Aurender integrated streamer/DACs

The comment about the DAC is concerning. Are you saying that Aurender's DAC is not good enough, and I should have bought a digital only streamer?

@gsomin  Yes.  That’s exactly what I’m saying given the other components in your system.  The DAC in the Aurender is a bottleneck and your system will reward you greatly with a better standalone DAC.  You can continue to use the Aurender as a streamer, but your system is crying out for a better DAC IMHO. 

@gsomin

I am sure no one said the Aurender DAC is bad. I’ve not heard that. But I have also not heard tremendous praise for it. So, I am sure it is a good DAC. Most of us that are dedicated to high end sound buy separates… Streamer and DAC. Typically separates at the same level will sound a bit better. Also, you get greater flexibility with separates. You can choose those that sound more to your liking. Also, much easier to upgrade.

Typically when a component breaks in, the sound will mellow, bass become more accurate and the soundstage will open up.

I noticed you mentioned cymbals. When the soundstage opens, it is likely the individual instruments will become more obvious. But your choice of words continues to make me think you are missing overly trebly / harsh high frequency.
 

When I was upgrading in the first couple decades of pursuing the high end, I noticed the “treble” was decreasing with system upgrades. it started to worry me. So I went on a crusade to listen to real treble… I listened to real cymbals, piano, etc. to my surprise, what was disappearing was the sssssh… it was high frequency hash and distortion… leaving the unadulterated sound of brass.

When the unit is broken in… listen to some big bells, and cymbals. Does the Aurender sound more like brass? Maybe it sounds more natural. That is good.

Btw, I owned Olympic 3’s for many years. Great, natural sounding speakers.

Hope I said something helpful here.

“The DAC in the Aurender is a bottleneck”

@soix

And you know this from direct experience with A200 in your system? 

And you know this from direct experience with A200 in your system?

@lalitk No, and fair point. But is the DAC in the A200 comparable to a Denafrips Terminator or the like? I think not, and I stand by my assertion that the level of the OP’s system deserves a better standalone DAC. I mean, the guy’s got about $25k invested in excellent electronics and speakers, and you think his best option is to use the internal DAC in a $6k streamer??? Have you compared the internal DAC of the A200 to higher-end DACs? I can’t imagine it’d fare very well. I could be wrong, but again I think not. His system deserves and requires a better DAC. I think @ghdprentice who’s very well versed in Aurender and excellent DACs may back me up on this. But again, I could be wrong.

@soix

In most cases, separates are capable of better sound. I never said, A200 DAC Is @gsomin best option given his system. The A200 DAC is not even fully broken-in and you rushed to conclude that A200 is a ‘bottleneck’ in his system. Was that a fair assertion on your part, I let you be the judge of that! This isn’t an argument about separate vs integrated. The best advice for @gsomin is to allow full break-in of A200. Post break-in, if he still don’t find A200 upgrade substantial over Node then going the separates route or another DAC to complement Node 2 or N200 would be the next logical step.

As far as comparison, my last comparison was Aurender A30 vs EMM Labs DA2 and I chose DA2. In this category, I will always choose and recommend separates as it offers most flexibility and convenience to tweak the sound to your liking.