Article: Sonore Signature Rendu SE Deluxe Review

View full article

Great review!  Much thanks! And I have added the three albums to my list.

I have been using my microRendu 1,4 for a long time.  Perhaps it is time to upgrade!

I guess I need to upgrade now.

Excellent review Chris!  Without a doubt, the new Signature Rendu SE Deluxe is the best Rendu Sonore has ever released.

Big fan of Sonore.  Currently running the opticalRendu deluxe with a farad PS, I do love it.  BTW, previous generation Signature Rendu SEs are upgradable via Sonore.  I think $995.00.

15 hours ago, amsco15 said:

Big fan of Sonore.  Currently running the opticalRendu deluxe with a farad PS, I do love it.  BTW, previous generation Signature Rendu SEs are upgradable via Sonore.  I think $995.00.

Is that all?  holy cow!

On 9/22/2024 at 11:20 PM, AudioDoctor said:

 

Is that all?  holy cow!

The upgrade cost is dependent on the age/serial number of the unit. The cost is more like $1220, not $995.

I guess I'll qualify for a broken record award here.  

But it seems odd that a $4K+ server feeding files to a $32K DAC needs help from a $5K box (which I believe is just another computer) to sound its best???  

1 minute ago, 57gold said:

I guess I'll qualify for a broken record award here.  

 

But it seems odd that a $4K+ server feeding files to a $32K DAC needs help from a $5K box (which I believe is just another computer) to sound its best???  

What’s odd about it?

Easy question.

Why would a $4K computer designed and optimized to deliver digital audio files in a pristine manner to a $32K worth of digital file receiving and processing hardware and software somehow fall short of their tasks, so much so as they need a $5k box of computer parts and software to remedy their design shortcomings?  

Between the two units of $36K of specialized gear, who dropped the ball.

7 hours ago, 57gold said:

Easy question.

 

Why would a $4K computer designed and optimized to deliver digital audio files in a pristine manner to a $32K worth of digital file receiving and processing hardware and software somehow fall short of their tasks, so much so as they need a $5k box of computer parts and software to remedy their design shortcomings?  

 

Between the two units of $36K of specialized gear, who dropped the ball.

 

You really seem to have an issue with cost of the products, and perhaps that’s what you find odd? 

More of a a level of incredulity that a state of the art server and DAC need another piece of equipment to fully perform their functions.  The DAC maker in this case has no financial constraints in making this unit fully functional at the highest level with the ability to accept, convert and output digital files at the highest levels from a purpose built music server with high quality design and parts.

Guess it seems like overkill.

1 hour ago, 57gold said:

More of a a level of incredulity that a state of the art server and DAC need another piece of equipment to fully perform their functions.  The DAC maker in this case has no financial constraints in making this unit fully functional at the highest level with the ability to accept, convert and output digital files at the highest levels from a purpose built music server with high quality design and parts.

 

Guess it seems like overkill.

I'm unsure where to start with your comments and the story you've crafted for yourself in terms of how things work, what's important, how much things cost, manufacturing constraints, etc... You've also read incredibly into what I said in the review, imagining things I didn't say, and making the story fit your narrative. 

It's all OK. Whatever brings people joy in this hobby is OK with me. 

Didn't craft a story nor quote your review or imagine anything.  

Also not sure what I'm missing about how a server works with a DAC?

15 minutes ago, 57gold said:

Didn't craft a story

Here you go:

1 hour ago, 57gold said:

a state of the art server and DAC need another piece of equipment to fully perform their functions.

You've crafted this in your head.

1 hour ago, 57gold said:

The DAC maker in this case has no financial constraints in making this unit fully functional

Another fiction.

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You really seem to have an issue with cost of the products, and perhaps that’s what you find odd? 

This is one of your pet snarks. Just as here

Total BS. Fake news. Information disorder. "Another fiction".

1 minute ago, Iving said:

 

This is one of your pet snarks. Just as here

 

Total BS. Fake news. Information disorder. "Another fiction".

I call it like I see it. Some people have a problem with the prices of goods and services, as if they are forced to purchase them. If you don't like the price of something, just move on. It isn't for you. 

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Some people have a problem with the prices of goods and services, as if they are forced to purchase them. If you don't like the price of something, just move on. It isn't for you. 

Strawman

We all know this.

You haven't any evidence 57 doesn't like prices. Any more than me wrt dCS. I've posted with glee ultra-High End gear from Ascot on your Forum since then - and not to prove a point to you.

57 seems to want to talk about why 2 computers instead of 1 before DAC. That is prima facie a technical matter. Why can't you conduct ordinary conversation without snark.

Just now, Iving said:

 

Strawman

We all know this.

You haven't any evidence 57 doesn't like prices. Any more than me wrt dCS. I've posted with glee ultra-High End gear from Ascot on your Forum since then - and not to prove a point to you.

57 seems to want to talk about why 2 computers instead of 1 before DAC. That is prima facie a technical matter. Why can't you conduct ordinary conversation without snark.

Not straw man at all. His constant mentioning of price as the only factor in his reasoning is what I find indicative of someone who has a serious issue with the prices of goods and services and wishes to focus on that rather than anything else. 

If the prices in this case were $50 and $100 and the goods were made by a mom and pop shop just trying to get by, perhaps he would've focused on technical reasoning or not even commented at all. 

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not straw man at all.

Obviously 57's primary point is astonishment that a 4k music server and a 36k DAC haven't covered the bases sufficiently - such that an extra computer might improve things. It's a technical issue. His mentioning the price is relevant because 36k ought to achieve a great deal by any common sense. Pulling your "57 doesn't like prices" rabbit out of your sole moderator hat is just unpleasant power gradient snark. If we spoke like that to you you'd have us on a high horse in a heartbeat. Why not talk to him about what the product under scrutiny can do to assist a relatively expensive DAC.

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If

perhaps

yadda yadda

1 minute ago, Iving said:

 

Obviously 57's primary point is astonishment that a 4k music server and a 36k DAC haven't covered the bases sufficiently - such that an extra computer might improve things. It's a technical issue. His mentioning the price is relevant because 36k ought to achieve a great deal by any common sense. Pulling your "57 doesn't like prices" rabbit out of your sole moderator hat is just unpleasant power gradient snark. If we spoke like that to you you'd have us on a high horse in a heartbeat. Why not talk to him about what the product under scrutiny can do to assist a relatively expensive DAC.

 

 

yadda yadda

Now that's the @Iving I'm used to, attacking me and making up some power gradient snark. 

You did change his argument a little to better fit your narrative I see. 

57:

11 hours ago, 57gold said:

Why would a $4K computer designed and optimized to deliver digital audio files in a pristine manner to a $32K worth of digital file receiving and processing hardware and software somehow fall short of their tasks, so much so as they need a $5k box of computer parts and software to remedy their design shortcomings?  

You:

4 minutes ago, Iving said:

a 4k music server and a 36k DAC haven't covered the bases sufficiently - such that an extra computer might improve things.

Vastly different. 

I don't buy into the premise of what either of you are suggesting. It's so rich to go into several areas of conjecture presented as fact, in just a few sentences, that I have little interest in responding. 

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Now that's the @Iving I'm used to, attacking me and making up some power gradient snark.

"making up"? You were given a link - leading to a page where I objected to YOU attacking ME. Not an isolated instance.

You are site owner and sole moderator. Fact or fiction. Fact of course. If you abuse that power gradient you shouldn't expect nil response/comment.