@wwm - Is the plan for you to listen to the Extreme with a Devialet amplifier, or will Hifi Lounge be demonstrating it with something else?
I always thought that the Expert sounded best when fed via AES/EBU. Following some past experiments with the Pro I think the Pro is better than the Expert fed via USB, but notwithstanding this, AES/EBU remains the optimum way to feed a Pro, to my ears at least. Bill - I note that you use an Aurender N10. A fine product in my view, when I tried one it was at the time just about the best thing I had heard feeding a Devialet (together with the W20). Also, I thought the Devialet sounded best when fed with the Aurender's AES/EBU output over the alternative of USB. Is that your own preference and how you use your N10? What I am thinking here is that I note that the Extreme has the option of AES/EBU output. Looking at their website, it looks like AES/EBU output is in fact a 2000 Euro option, making things even more expensive, but if I was lucky enough to hear one with a Devialet then I think I would want to hear the AES/EBU option. Consider, if the Devialet does actually perform better by AES/EBU (to my ears or another's ears), then maybe no USB product at any price could outperform a reasonably decent AES/EBU source with a Devialet? Just a thought.
The Extreme is certainly an interesting product, and by that I mean it is interesting in absolute terms. Can a £25000 product really offer a sound quality improvement that justifies such a high price tag? It is actually interesting because of it's build quality and the very high price tag, and to see if that can genuinely translate into something tangible and related to the actual enjoyment of the music. (FWIW, that is more or less how I interpreted your comment in the OP, I did not read it as a "clear" statement that you think price equates to sound, for the simple reason that you did not write something that actually stated or implied this)
Anyway, I hope you have some fun and have an enjoyable visit to Hifi lounge. I look forward to reading about how you get on.
@bernardl - I use Roon sometimes, and no doubt that they do a good job in many areas. That said, there has been a lot of stuff posted on other forums recently regarding updates to Roon that have negatively influenced sound quality. Furthermore, there have been some discussions on the Roon forum covering this, which have basically been shut down with much talk of expectation bias, insults, and stating that if you have bit perfect playback then any perceived variance in sound quality is imagined. The impression this gives is that Roon is library management tool, but the developers are not that interested in optimising for sound quality. Indeed, many believe and insist that once you achieve bit perfect playback, that is it, nothing could be better. Of course, some are also some that believe that music software can influence sound quality, in terms of how processors are used, latency, buffering and many other aspects. I do not wish to get into the debate as to who is right or wrong here, these debates are typically inconclusive and a waste of time. But I think it is fair to say that when you look at playback software and who is or is not trying very hard to optimise purely for sound quality, it is not Roon who is at the cutting edge with respect to sound quality. That said, I have read some reports that the latest update of Roon (build 610) addresses some of the concerns of the SQ software purists and does indeed sound a little better, so who knows. I guess that if the developers have tweaked Roon to improve sound quality, they may have needed to keep quiet about it to avoid brutal attack from their own forum members! I do not have a strong view myself on this topic, but it is fair to say that for some, the worst aspect of Roon is that it is not the best software for sound quality, despite Roon's excellence in many areas.
I always thought that the Expert sounded best when fed via AES/EBU. Following some past experiments with the Pro I think the Pro is better than the Expert fed via USB, but notwithstanding this, AES/EBU remains the optimum way to feed a Pro, to my ears at least. Bill - I note that you use an Aurender N10. A fine product in my view, when I tried one it was at the time just about the best thing I had heard feeding a Devialet (together with the W20). Also, I thought the Devialet sounded best when fed with the Aurender's AES/EBU output over the alternative of USB. Is that your own preference and how you use your N10? What I am thinking here is that I note that the Extreme has the option of AES/EBU output. Looking at their website, it looks like AES/EBU output is in fact a 2000 Euro option, making things even more expensive, but if I was lucky enough to hear one with a Devialet then I think I would want to hear the AES/EBU option. Consider, if the Devialet does actually perform better by AES/EBU (to my ears or another's ears), then maybe no USB product at any price could outperform a reasonably decent AES/EBU source with a Devialet? Just a thought.
The Extreme is certainly an interesting product, and by that I mean it is interesting in absolute terms. Can a £25000 product really offer a sound quality improvement that justifies such a high price tag? It is actually interesting because of it's build quality and the very high price tag, and to see if that can genuinely translate into something tangible and related to the actual enjoyment of the music. (FWIW, that is more or less how I interpreted your comment in the OP, I did not read it as a "clear" statement that you think price equates to sound, for the simple reason that you did not write something that actually stated or implied this)
Anyway, I hope you have some fun and have an enjoyable visit to Hifi lounge. I look forward to reading about how you get on.
@bernardl - I use Roon sometimes, and no doubt that they do a good job in many areas. That said, there has been a lot of stuff posted on other forums recently regarding updates to Roon that have negatively influenced sound quality. Furthermore, there have been some discussions on the Roon forum covering this, which have basically been shut down with much talk of expectation bias, insults, and stating that if you have bit perfect playback then any perceived variance in sound quality is imagined. The impression this gives is that Roon is library management tool, but the developers are not that interested in optimising for sound quality. Indeed, many believe and insist that once you achieve bit perfect playback, that is it, nothing could be better. Of course, some are also some that believe that music software can influence sound quality, in terms of how processors are used, latency, buffering and many other aspects. I do not wish to get into the debate as to who is right or wrong here, these debates are typically inconclusive and a waste of time. But I think it is fair to say that when you look at playback software and who is or is not trying very hard to optimise purely for sound quality, it is not Roon who is at the cutting edge with respect to sound quality. That said, I have read some reports that the latest update of Roon (build 610) addresses some of the concerns of the SQ software purists and does indeed sound a little better, so who knows. I guess that if the developers have tweaked Roon to improve sound quality, they may have needed to keep quiet about it to avoid brutal attack from their own forum members! I do not have a strong view myself on this topic, but it is fair to say that for some, the worst aspect of Roon is that it is not the best software for sound quality, despite Roon's excellence in many areas.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
