Portable DAC Review: Aurender Flow

audioquest jitterbug - made the aurender overly warm, horrible. horrible, don't use it. jh audio sotm cable with wirelss birdge -makes a difference the jitterbug smooths out the chord hugo, adds a touch of warmth enjoyable to listen to. loses a bit of sparkle on strings. everything is tighter and more controlled. better bass response. OA

A great sounding DAC, it sounds like a high end dac off the bat, and i was just listening to the msb. diminsihing returns!
vocals are beautiful, balanced presentation
strings are naturally presented
very musical
man makes me think...this dac sounds good, why do i need anything else for portable? and I've heard and own the top of the line stuff. ariana sounds really good.
ask about me - man it sounds really good, good slam, tight, atmospheric thunder
a way - great reverb, great vocals
marta gomez - cielto - black background,
everything sounds good, it's a great DAC
MJ black or white - good test song to test depth and soundstage, not as good as the top of the line but decent. not as deep.
bass is well controlled
vs Mojo
MUCH wider sound stage but not as much warmth (MJ song, knocking kid)
bass is there when called for it
WOW sounds really good
the aurender has a bigger sound, more height.
mojo is clean and crisp
more shine, vocals are tighter and sound more realistic. more refined
more exciting, more shine, better treble extension, playful
aurender - definitely a much larger sound, much much larger, more lifesize sound. detailed. vocals are crystal clear.
subbass - mojo beats the aurender here by a long shot - let it go by james bay, the reverb doesn't really exist on the aurender
outside of the larger sound and extra sparkle on treble, the mojo is a lot more coherent and natural sounding. more enjoyable to my ears. A bit strident in comparison to the mojo.
EDM - the aurender has better separation, dynamics, but doesn't match int he bass department. The aurender is more detailed more fuller sound. sounds better than mojo. mojo is a bit of a hot mess.
Brass - blackground. wow, the mojo has a much more luscious brass sound...albiet more realistic. in decay, etc. more convincing.
acoustic strings - soundmaker - much wamer sound, a lot of bass atomspherics. a little too much? clouds the music. The aurender is a lot tighter, better imaging, better controlled. the mojo sounded like a hot mess when it gets busy. blurry and smearing everywhere with the mojo. mojo has more slam.
overall i still think the aurender is the superior dac. the mojo is playful. the vocals are definitelyl sweeter on the mojo, but aurender is still good.
fiedliety - the bass hits really really hard. the vocals are much better on the mojo. seductive, no grain. aurender is a bit grainy and digitally compressed in comparison. man it sounds a lot better than the aurender. a more sweet presentation. for this song the mojo kills it.
marta - aurender definitely has more sparkle to strings, a lot more detail on the vocals, bigger sound, just not sweet. more emotive than the mojo. mojo is just a seductive sound, like lcd-3. aurender wins.
ask about me - huge sound. i think it's great for IEMs. almost like lcd-3 vs hd 800. smooths out vocals. ice cube sounds more realistic here than on the aurender. the warm really helps this song. The aurender is just cleaner. aurender is much more dynamic. much blacker background, mojo is dark, bass heavy. dark is a good way to put it.
breaks my heart - mojo = lcd -3 , aurender = hd 800
ariana - piano sounds really good on the aurender, snapping good reverb. aurender is technically correct and overall a bit more natural tonality. balanced. mojo = seductive. you could hear detaisl in the voice more on the aurender.
avirl - the mojo just has an enormous bass presence. i think it masks the music in some ways. the aurender just has better separation and clarity and more balanced. i think the mojo might be overly dark.
bottomline - seems like mojo is some dark chocolate. the aurender is still more detailed and overall still superior. the mojo is the slut, more playful. If you enjoy the darker sound, mojo. it's seductive and smooths out brighter songs. still very detailed. treble doesn't extend as high. the aurender has much better separation and a bigger sound. the mojo excells in smoothing out voices into a seductive sound. overall coherence is very good with the mojo. the aurender sounds more like a high end DAC to my ears. mojo has more rumble. aurender is much more dynamic. mojo sweeter. preference but mojo can't be reference.
vs Chord Hugo
baghdad (live) - prat isn't as great as the hugo. it has good detail and sounds like a good dac tho.
aurender has a bigger sound
chord has much more realistic imaging. the first strum of the guitar is abnormally tall for the aurender and doesn't sound as accurate.
chord sounds more like a live performance. the decay is much better. better microdetails
aurender - plucking is a bit smeared, isn't as crisp or fast as hugo. hugo has more control and is more tight.
chord just more texture and aurender sounds a bit soft and flat in comparison.
ship in the night
hugo is more detailed, you could hear the echo, everything is tight and clear
aurender sounds a bit smeared and uncontrolled in comparison, a bit fuzzy
hugo better layering
vocals are more natural on hugo
hugo is much sharper, the aurender sounds flatter for sure, imaging as great, everything sounds forward and on the same plane.
the jitterbug actually sharpens the aurender a bit.
aurender has a higher empthasis on a treble zing
vocals are much tighter and detailed than aurender.
the echo in the beginning of the song is smeared on the aurender
roses
hugo much better layering and separation, doesn't even compete.
no contest on this one, hugo. the aurender sounds like a smeared, flat mess.
hugo exudes control, tightness, precision, great separation, much more musical and enjoyable.
ask about me
hugo has a much more natural tonality and male vocalists are more organic. aurender flat and lacks defintino.
aurender did have more sub-bass reverb however.
it really doesn't sound that bad on the aurender
layla
aurender is flatter, not as dynamic, drums, piano, on the same plane. still very detailed.
fuzzy background, not very tight
aurender is warmer
overall i would say the sound is softer
jitterbug helps with the blacker background
Jitterbug helps tighten up the music, no more fuzziness.but it dulls the sound a quite a bit.
with the better dynamics, and better layering, might be using the jitterbug
more smearing on the vocals
the smearing affects the sound of the guitar and blurs it out in exchange for better warmth
without the jitterbug, the soundstage collapses, warmth is loss, music becomes nonengaging. bass definition and heft is lost.
overarching - the hugo just layers better, more detail, sharp vocals, technically great. aurender still a great dac, just sucks there's no inbetween as far as having a jitterbug or not as there are tradeoffs. If you prefer a warmer sound, the aurender is probably for you.aurender stil has better sub-bass resolution and heft. the hugo may be too analytical to some ears however. no choclate, just the almond.
avirl - anything but ordinary
chord has better clarity and separation. aurender sounds warm and smeared but has better bass presence, weight, and definition. that seems to be the main thing it has going for it.
chord you hear more of the music.
quite honestly, it doesn't sound bad on the aurender flow, mids are more forward, just bass heavy. just a bit smeared. hugo has an obvious sense of separation.
in case you were curious on how the chord hugo stacks up with the MSB analog...it doesn't really but it sounds closer to a hugo than an aurender. the MSB is just perfection, clarity, detail, sharpness, and expansive sound. the tonality is also more msuic. a 4k vs 1080p type thing + more. extreme separation. with hugo, lows bleed into mids into treble. sounds like a smeared mess in comparison. super digital sound. extension is incredible on the msb.