Grimm MU1 Streamer - Really "The Best"?

@lalitk

Both Innuos and Aurender makes great streamers and from here on your personal taste of the sonic signature in the context of the rest of the system will ultimately be the deciding factor in your choice of streamer.

I am in agreement 100 %. Personal preference is the dominant determinant. All of the really fine components have trade off strengths and weaknesses. Listeners inevitably pick and choose.

Charles

While I recognize that the OP has purchased a pre-owned Aurender for trial, another Grimm user asked that I post (repost) my comments from another thread regarding the fabulous new Network Acoustics Muon Pro streaming system and my experience with it and the Grimm MU1. I had commented earlier in this thread my appreciation for the Muon streaming system when I owned an Innuos Zenith and my bewilderment that the Muon system didn’t seem to enhance the streaming experience with the Grimm.

Yeah it sounds pretty fantastic with the Muon Pro streaming system and I thought it sounded fantastic before, but I'm trying to get my arms around what is really happening. Some out there might scream confirmation bias...but they would be wrong. I have no skin in the game and further, the cost of these, while not insignificant to many, is immaterial to me. The Network Acoustics Muon Pro made a HUGE difference to an already exceptional presentation provided by my Grimm Audio MU1 Server/Streamer. Wow, just WOW.

From router to switch I have swapped in 3 different ethernet cables (AQ Vodka, Totaldac ethernet cable/filter, Network Acoustics Muon ethernet cable) and the Network Acoustics Muon cable sounds more effortless and "alive". Its probably my imagination but that's how it settled for me.

From my Network Acoustics Rubicon switch into my Grimm Audio MU1 server/streamer I tried the same three ethernet cables by themselves and I really couldn't tell them apart.

I then tried the same three cables with the Network Acoustics Muon filter and same result, no discernable difference. Now with my previous Innuos Zenith Mk3 server, the Muon filter/Muon cable made a material positive difference. As I've stated before, I figured the Grimm just didn't need the help or, put another way, I assumed the Grimm "solved" many/most of the same issues that the Muon streaming system addressed.

Next up, I inserted the new Network Acoustics Muon Pro ethernet cable and Muon Pro filter in between my Rubicon switch and Grimm MU1 server/streamer and ... SNAP! ... it was almost a component level positive change. Unreal.  So, the dilemma...and the question: why does ANY of this stuff make a difference? LOL. It does make a material difference but WHY?!?!?

The Grimm (and many other products of a similar nature) loads the entire song (or album) into its memory and then, in the case of the Grimm, it does its magic to the file and plays it back to my dac via AES/EBU. I can disconnect the ethernet cable from the Grimm "on the fly", then "hot swap" to the next cable and the music never stops playing. I can then queue up a new track, it travels through the Muon Pro system into the Grimm's memory so that I can A - B in a reasonably controlled way.

I hear what I hear and I would prefer the previous outcome with the other cables: no material difference....but there IS a material positive difference...but why? Many servers are optimized for 100mbps and it appears the Grimm and the new Muon Pro are both optimized for a Gigabit. Whatever the reason, the Muon Pro was developed for studio use and it has made an amazing difference. 

Aurender N20 is quite a bit more expensive than Innuos Zenith, even if you add the cost for USB reclocker. A better comparison would have been with N10. FWIW, I tried the N10 last year and did not find the Innuos Zenith MK3 lacking in any way. It was a coin flip and I only went with Zenith due to Roon support. Hopefully, someone can compare the N20 with Statement for a more fair assessment.

Okay, after some good warmup time, here are my initial thoughts. My Innuos setup and the N20 both excel in different areas!

As stated above I am in the earliest phase of assessment. So, my thoughts are sure to evolve. I think it’s pretty typical to immediately notice the good things for any new piece, but the less good things can require some soak time living with it for an extended period before they come out. So I may be more attuned to any slight differences in my Innuos setup having lived with it for some time. And currently I’m only comparing USB before my AES demo cable arrives (hopefully soon).

One note on the relative fairness of this “fight” - while the N20 costs more than my prior Innuos setup, with the Innuos Statement the tables would be turned and the Statement costs a fair bit more than the N20. Not that pricing is the be all and end all, but it’s sort of like how boxers have a “reach” advantage/disadvantage vs opponents. In my case the N20 has the advantage.

Overall, I’m relieved I hear a big difference. I would have been disappointed but not surprised had I not heard much of a difference. But I do! One big caveat is that I think my preferred player is system dependent, and that my preference would likely have been different in my old system before my upgrades last year.

Innuos Zenith Mk3 + PhoenixUSB reclocker :

• Someone in another forum had said Innuos “is the closest thing to a concert hall experience”. That one note from one individual stood out. Because I always thought my system sounded like a concert hall, where the listener is set back from the performers. I always found the vocals to be set back in the 3D mix of instruments. I wasn’t sure how I felt about this effect - with some music it was brilliant. I always thought that the effect was due to my speakers but that one person’s comment stuck out for me. Sure enough, with the N20, this effect disappeared and the music is more “front row” now. Currently I’m preferring this effect but it could be just as a novelty.
• My Innuos setup has better mid and high frequency resolution. There is no question. I can hear air, breath, and raspiness come through with vocals much clearer with Innuos. Maybe this difference will change as my N20 warms up more.
• My Innuos setup has a bigger front to back soundstage. I’m not sure I actually like that fact, as currently I’m enjoying the immediacy of the Aurender.
• The Innuos setup has bigger (but not better) bass, in terms of going lower! I’m not certain this would be true if I measured it, but the way bass is presented between the two, that’s what my ears hear. Reserve judgement until you see the N20 counterpoint on bass below.

Aurender N20

• Number one biggest thing I notice is that everything is smoother and with less edge across all frequency bands. Very inviting.
• To use crutch-words: “organic”, “good musical flow”, “natural”, vs my prior Innuos setup. This is the one that is harder to put into words. Overall I can get into the music easier and it takes me further away from focusing on HiFi pyrotechnics. Not literal pyrotechnics thank goodness. It’s a simpler sound, more essential. Sorry if these aren’t descriptive enough as I’m describing the effect on me rather than the attribute of the sound…
• Slightly more engaging sound - all frequencies delivered with a bit more energy/conviction (but still smoother than the Innuos setup). This leads to more “snap” to the music, with better PRAT. The effect on me is that it seems like the music is playing faster even though it’s not.
• Front to back soundstage is not as deep - vocals forward, presented more evenly (and I think, naturally) with other instruments. Don’t get me wrong the soundstage is still impressively deep. The width I think is the same, but one thing is that the Innuos has more crispness to electric guitars on the very edge of the stage whereas the Aurender has more meat/fleshiness.
• While the Aurender seems to have less overall bass (subjectively speaking), the bass is more satisfying and I don’t feel like I am missing anything. The bass is more tuneful and with more rhythm. It integrates better with percussion because of this. I think this leads to delivery of music as more of a cohesive whole.

Overall I am currently enjoying the Aurender more, but remember it’s the new piece! Which always has the initial advantage over the old piece due to human bias. I’m sure I’ll uncover nits with time. Maybe I’ll start missing the better resolution of the Innuos. The Aurender sounds less fussy and more simplistic, and is more “down to basics” and getting all that right. The Innuos is more about doing all of the range of things audiophiles talk about at a more extreme level, in terms of ultimate resolution and depth of soundstage. Again I cannot say that I prefer one brand over the other, this is just a comparison of the two particular setups from each brand. Finally, I’ll say this: my system has become very, very revealing after my upgrades last year. Possibly/probably too revealing as my system has become ultra finicky with respect to speaker positioning, quality of power, etc. Had I not applied these upgrades and with a less revealing system, I think I may have preferred the Innuos setup as it might have squeezed some more detail out of my less revealing system. The Aurender may have been a tad too smooth before. Takeaway is stating the obvious - my preference is almost surely system dependent.

​

@ghasley 

You have affirmed what I pretty much suspected. The Network Acoustics Muon filtering system is the real deal. It will be a part of my upcoming audio streaming system. Thanks for sharing your latest listening experiences.

Charles