Hello Auralic owners. I’m looking at the Auralic Aries G1 and was wondering if it is worth the extra cost for the Aries 2.1? If there’s any one that has experience with either one let me know. I’ve already received good input from badbeef so I’m just looking for a little more info. The 2.1 one adds galvanic isolation and the ability to add a SSD, otherwise I’m not sure it’s worth the extra cost. The Auralic forum doesn’t seem as informative as the PS Audio forum. Thanks in advance!
The G2.1 adds a lightning link too so you can connect to their other L-Link devices
I have a G2 and from what I remember when I was researching there were some advantages over the G1 but according to auralic there was no reason for a user to upgrade from a G2 to a 2.1.
I believe the G2 also has one.
I guess it all depends in the rest of your kit. If you have $40,000 system then just get a G2. If you’re on a budget get a G1. Fitting internal ssd inside a G2 is a waste of time as the internal psu hasn’t got enough juice to initialise it. I should know, I have one
Have G2.1 with internal ssd drive works and sounds great. Several changes made to 2.1 involved improving hd compatibly and improved Usb power conections etc
Use Aes/ebu to DS is great wish HDMI was psaudio compatible but…
User interface (lightening ) is great sounds best in it
I am in the middle of deciding between the G1 and 2.1 as well.
I do not plan on using an internal HDD.
I have been told the the 2.1 sounds better and worth the upgrade.
What do you think?
Was going to go USB to DSD.
This is what my dealer recommended instead of AES.
Just doing a quick comparison the G2.1 is built for keeping electrical noise out and everything is galvanically isolated. I’ve heard great stuff on the G1 and I’ve also found topics on usb output and power supply fixes. The G2.1 cost $2400 more than G1 almost double the price. I have no doubt it’s better but is it $2400 better? If it addresses the issues some may have with the G1 than it might be worth the price.
this is a significant difference in price.
But as most of us know,
reducing noise is paramount.
Digital Noise Etc. has been discussed on this form and others.
I am going to stay tuned to see what others have to say.
Historically, I had the SSD within the Nucleus+. Recently, switched to Naim Core as music server (SSD) and stopped using the SSD within the Nucleus+. I noticed a remarkable improvement.
Nucleus+ > Matrix > DS DAC
There was discussion on Auralic forum site on that topic of G1 vs G2.1 the pwer dupply galvanic isolation and numerous other things bent to 2.1 ( of course i am biased) l really like it. The digital noise floor greatly reduced coming off Music vault i was using better sound with more depth clarity and soundstage. I also like the Lightening operating system Auralic has. sounds better than Roon to me. The g2.1 is Roon ready if you want it though
It was worth upgrade for me
Good luck and good listening!
“No matter where you go…there you are”
Any output from the G1 I had sounded wonderful. A proper Matrix setup added little if anything. They work well, I wish I had an excuse to buy one.
For once aangen, I would have to disagree with you (hey, no offence ) for me a matrix & Farad makes a huge difference (with my G2)
1…says the guy who talked many here into buying one…
- I was just this week listening to the AES output compared with the Matrix chain, and they sounded quite different. Good, yeah - but the AES was much more “in the speakers” and didn’t have the openness and liquidity of the Matrix rig. But of course at a cost. And perhaps if I Just Had The Right AES cable…
I only listened to the AES again as I’d been trying to reclock the AES out of the G1 with my Mutec clock, hoping that that might be competitive with the Matrix for less money. (So - AES in and out of the Mutec to DS). But unfortunately the DS didn’t like something the Mutec is doing with the bits, and so - though it saw the signal and got the bits right on the DS’s display - it didn’t pass audio, and failed the Bit Perfect tests.
@aangen Al - you know I love you, bruh, right? Not kidding. You have been Right nearly every time IMO about all of the the things you’ve waxed enthusiastic about here. Love your curiosity and enthusiasm.
I’m glad you addressed this badbeef. I was wondering if I went with the AES connector I could remove the matrix out of the system assuming I get a Aries streamer. Sounds like no is the answer to that question. The other observation is will the DirectStream play DSD 128 through AES connections?
Ooof. Not entirely sure how I addressed the AES topic, other than in a very specific way/use case.
Using AES has nearly nothing to do with the Matrix, as what it does is take USB (it’s only input) and converts it to other flavors of digital - well, OK, including AES - but most importantly, including PS-compatible I2S - which is why most PS users are into it. Try not to read into that any further than that. Again, the Matrix is Not Necessary. It is a potentially fruitful tweakfest to pursue AFTER you have your Streamer and DAC sorted.
And don’t get me started on the DSD-multiple-rates thing. I love DSD, but making gear decisions around “How many DSDs will a DSD do, if a DS could Do D-X?”
Shoot me now.
Great question again.
I was encouraged to go with USB instead of AES for these type of files.
Maybe i missed something but what about using USB?
There seems to be some differences in opinions as usual regarding needing the Matrix with DSD and Auralic.
Have seen several people say it is not needed
Totally agree with you.
Many DSD users are into making everything go through I2S.
For the price of the Matrix it should not be to difficult to try one out after getting DAC and streamer figured in addition to quality cables.
I am sorry I brought up High Rez Audio isue.
It really all just about SQ.
But I did want to know if AES could pass these resolutions?