I have no halfway to comparison yet, except with Bridge II, but I would notice if anything was problematic or limiting. I added the Airlens while some other improvements were done, but I can say that it greatly contributed to what we usually wish for. Better resolution (others call it black background)… means realism, 3D, air and details as well as additional control, focus and the long awaited openness and touch of energy in the top end, that made my cap choice in the modded DS Mk I quite perfect, although I still have to get to my cabling standard while still using a tuned AQ Carbon 48 so far.
All this comes with better recordings and higher resolution files distancing the lower qualities much more, respectively showing the potential of higher and highest sampling rates. It gets very obvious what vinyl listeners heard since long…only resolutions from DXD or DSD128 upwards start to reveal characteristics that were previously just known from the best analog recording and playback and that those resolutions are another world really if the recording enables it. To hear this even makes one a bit angry, what was sold to us as this level so long before already. But also differences between CD format and resolutions up to 192kHz or DSD64 get more obvious, close to hearing blindly if it’s just CD quality. The AirLens is of a quality, which will make other missing, more important measures in many setups much more essential than looking out for further differences to other streamers imo.
Well, I just dropped off the Airlens at FedEx. My trial window was running out and I had to make a call one way or the other. To summarize, the unit appeared well-constructed. Set up was a breeze. Sound quality improved during the month I had it. It clearly bettered my gen1 Sonos Connect for lossy streaming, but failed to improve upon my Mojo Audio-modified Mac Mini for high-res streaming.
My equipment rack has a lot of PS Audio gear in it, so I was hopeful that the Airlens would find a home there as well, but each piece of gear in my set up has earned its place by clearly sounding better than what it replaced. The Airlens didn’t meet that standard, so back it went unfortunately. To be clear, it did sound good - quite good actually - just not better than my current set up. I suspect that many people moving up from integrated network cards in DACs or less-optimized streamers will find it fits well in their system.
So it looks like I may have to spend more $ to find an improvement over my current set up. I haven’t listened to that many dedicated streamers, but from the comments in the thread so far it seems like the Airlens was sounding as good as or better than a few others in its price range. The search continues I guess.
At least from a pure user review standpoint, on average one can’t say the AirLens is a success here.
I so far heard it against an Aries 2.2, which had better preconditions than the AirLens at that time (tuning, cabling and the storage/SW it played from). Given that, the AirLens was worse but no disappointment, not out of the world. In this setup, every tiny deviation from the same precondition is audible quite obviously, so I hope I’m able to make a comparison with better matching preconditions some time later.
Will be interesting what magazine reviews say, but is there any reviewer who can be taken serious, who really compares and doesn’t just copy the brochure, add some audiophile stereotypes and write a solo review without any danger of surprising the manufacturer?
I have a PST and DSD MKII in my system and would benchmark any streamer against that combination. My hope is that the sound of any streamer I choose to purchase is at least as good as the PST/MKII combo. If it is better, then maybe time to consider buying a new transport. I’ve been eying the HiFi Rose RS130 for quite some time. Would be curious about your initial experience with this unit (looking to pull the triggger on a streamer early next year).
I’m not sure if you saw it, but my assessment of the RS130 is that to me it is at least as good as the PST, both being fed into the MkII with identical Dragon I2S cables. I have reached the “It no longer matters to me which one is switched in” point, which is where I want to be.
At this price point, though, there are others to consider. The one criticism I do have is with their own app - it’s not as polished and bug free as it should be for hardware in this price segment. That, and gapless DSF is not working no matter which interface you use. You can get around the second problem by running ISO DSD, but a user shouldn’t have to resort to that if they don’t want to.
I’m not trying to talk you out of the RS130! It’s a wonderful machine; sonically it’s everything I was hoping it would be. And hopefully as time goes on the interface and functional issues will get worked out. In the meantime, though, for the money there’s the Lumin U2, and others, all of which have their supporters. It’s a competitive price segment. I imagine any of them can sound great in a matching system. Good luck!
Mind you, the choice of personal. I had the chance to compare the U2 and the RS130, before I purchased the RS130. They’re both very good, but I like the RS130 better, obviously. Also, for now I’m having issues with playing DSD256 through Roon to my MK2. So, this device is also having some ‘not-ready-for-market-yet’ issues, that I like to see resolved asap…
BTW, by the end of this week, I have the opportunity to compare the RS130 to the AL. Still curious to what that will hold in store.
I’m always hesitant with conclusions as I’m not sure what exactly people compare, how much burned in the equipment is etc. I have no real to comparison yet except with Bridge II. Bridge II was limited by the integration in the DAC but not bad. The AirLens is much better, so that I assume it can compete at and maybe above its price level.
However I have no hope that anyone from press will do a comparative review, as they almost never do it. All we finally have to know is how it sounds from personal listening and there it delivered what I hoped for. Especially better resolution and realism and better top and bottom end.
He’s just a little (or a lot) too self promotional for me. Too much of “THIS one is the BEST thing ever” so forget about the one from last week (or yesterday).
to 
