Any audiophile use computer (MacBook) as your audio streaming source?

Supermicro is the first brand that came up. There may be less expensive options out there.

@milpai The T+A DAC200 is essentially two DACs (PCM and DSD) in one, so a very good choice in this scenario. Plus, it looks great!

Here's a link, scroll about halfway down, there's a top view of the BDP-3 with the cover off.

https://www.stereolife.pl/archiwum/testy/przetworniki-i-streamery/3321-bryston-bdp-3

Here is the inside of a $4,000 Bryston BDP-3 audiophile streamer. Computer aficionados will be familiar with much of the componentry.

? Pic doesn't display?

The BDP-3 is largely a computer but one that is built specifically to do one thing.

Streamers are computers. Some brands, such as marque du jour Aurender, make a convincing effort to conceal that basic fact. And they’re right, because who wants a $14K piece of kit with a $69 motherboard at its heart? Others, like Bryston, don’t seem especially concerned.

Admittedly, most - if not all - off-the-shelf computers are unfit to stream digital music. They don’t have a place in a proper audiophile system.

But a purpose-built computer absolutely does. Usually this means a machine you build yourself of thoughtfully selected components, and properly set up and configured OS and software.

A computer lets you run any software you want, and that alone makes a decisive case for using them. You’re not stuck with software cobbled together by a small electronics-focused business that has zero expertise in software development. Someone recently posted about a wyred4sound unit whose driver’s supported-OS list topped out at Windows 8 if I remember correctly.

Or maybe you own tens of thousands of files of rare recordings that you carefully organized on your NAS, but the crappy software in your new dedicated streamer is unimpressed by your librarian skills and refuses to display or play a good number of them.

Speaking of NAS, I was glad to see the same Synology NAS I own in the virtual system of a member who is apparently rather revered in elevated audiophile circles. Yet a NAS is just a computer, right?

On the flip side a computer will output to USB, therefore a person will need a USB DAC with, preferably, a very good clock.

A lot of misconceptions and unchallenged groupthink are floating around computers in the context of high-end audio. If I had a say, I would encourage folks to keep an open mind and take the time to inform themselves on the subject and develop enough knowledge to at least discuss them intelligently. Beyond that, everyone is free to welcome in their systems whatever component they feel works best for them.

Sounds like pretty much everyone reporting sonic improvements from switching to a dedicated streamer so far had a macbook or macmini before.

Personally I wouldn’t use apple for a door stop, but I’m biased that way :)

In any event, it’s not surprising because no computer puts out great audio in factory configuration, notwithstanding the belief that apple "sounds" better, and apple supposedly uses / used a slightly better audio / DAC chip in at least some of their products. That may help a little if you plug desktop speakers in your macbook, but in a more serious listening configuration the PC’s onboard audio circuitry is bypassed.

A dedicated PC can cost more than some used streamers, but the main point of a PC is its almost limitless configurability, giving users the peace of mind that they will never be locked into inadequate, subpar or obsolete proprietary software.

If you already own a DAC that has a good clock, galvanic isolation and all the I/O ports you want, you don’t really need a DDC. On the other hand a good DDC can mean a new lease on life to a vintage DAC you love. If your DAC is just old or middling, upgrading to a good newer one might cost less than adding a DDC.

I kind of feel like the less boxes, the less interconnects, the better off I am, generally speaking at least.

@soix Thank you for your post and your point is well taken. I'm against extra boxes on principle, but maybe further investigation is warranted here.

Some would argue that some DDCs are "voiced", or that they add a little bit of gain to the signal. Either or both would produce audible differences.

You have to wonder why so many seemingly reliable and reasonable folks report that strictly digital components (streamers, DDCs, etc.) make a sonic difference when logically they should not. What if the differencse were built in by the designer?

Whaa? One could plug his hifi streamer into his big TV or projector, sit back with a wireless keyboard/mouse and watch Netflix too??? HBO Max too??? Watch music videos and concerts with hifi audio on a streamer??? Play games??? Send emails??? The streamer (pc) can do that??? Whaaa???

I’ve been doing just that for the better part of, oh, 20 years and I honestly cannot fathom why anyone would set up their home cinema otherwise. In the past I would fish CAT cables through the walls to my media room, but nowadays you can easily stream perfectly steady 4K video over a garden-variety wifi connection. I am not using this setup for 2-channel audio listening though. One small caveat is that HTPCs often don’t play well with ARC / eARC. Mine sure doesn’t. But that’s a minor nit.

@deep_333 One thing I would add to your PC list is cooling fans. You don’t want them, and that can be a little tricky. CPUs and GPUs run hot. Liquid cooling works but will rule out most ITX-class enclosures because it's bulky. The good news is that audio processing is not CPU-intensive so you can run any number of low-power chipsets yet have power to spare. Seems like manyaudiophile streamers run ARM processors.

@yyzsantabarbara Interesting. Can you comment on your fiber setup? Toslink is fiber too, just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding.

@yyzsantabarbara I guess I was hoping to learn more about the types of components that make up your fiber chain, like end points, interfaces and such. If that was explained in previous threads then by all means please point to them. Thank you!

@yyzsantabarbara Thank you for the additional info, however on a conceptual level I am still confused. I may just be missing something obvious.

How can fiber constitute a "moat" when it is merely a conduit without filtering abilities of its own? If a noisy signal enters a fiber run, isn't it delivered identically at the other end, noise and all?

And if SFP fiber does in fact erect a "moat" protecting a system from noise, why wouldn't coaxial and toslink do the same?

Fiber won't pick up noise along the way like copper might, but what about the noise that entered the signal upstream of the first endpoint?.

Fiber audio networking is new to me, so these may be stupid questions. If so I do apologize.

@mitch2 Thank you for helping recenter and focus this thread with your excellent post, thorough and thoughtful like your ongoing DAC review series which I also follow.

Digital audio nomenclature is understood and used pretty loosely, resulting in reasonable people talking past each other when in fact they're talking about different things. Sometimes what's left out of an exchange matters as much as what's being said. Imagine two people arguing online about, I don't know, the fit of a pair of jeans. One says they're great, the other says they're horrible. One weighs 140 lbs, the other 280 lbs but neither ever says so.

Unfortunately, when it's like that, observers don't gain anything from the exchange besides confusion.

@yyzsantabarbara You put a bug in my ear with that fiber stuff. Turns out Supermicro makes fanless mini-PCs with dual built-in SFPs, and probably other brands do too.

One of those PCs and a SFP-equipped DAC would make a great backbone for an all-fiber digital system.

Inexpensive OM3 fiber can carry 10 gigabit Ethernet over 1 km (about 1,100 yards), which is handy if you have a large property, and short distance it can carry 100 gigabit, though the SFP may be limited to 25.

@yyzsantabarbara Here is a PC streamer that, in addition to supporting SFP, checks every audiophile box. Barebones price is 3900 € but I quickly customized it to 9660 €. It's a useful template for state of the art PC streaming though. 

https://griggaudio.de/produkt/fis-audio-pc-konfigurator/

And people are concerned about the high price for dedicated "audiophile" streamers? Geez.

@mclinnguy I don’t disagree with your point. This PC example was meant to be anecdotal and not a recommendation. In fact, you could build a very similar machine around a HD Plex case for probably $3-4K.

At the upper end of the price spectrum, according to this exhaustive review, the revered Taiko Extreme streamer is built around a Asus WS C621E server board and a pair of Intel Xeons running Windows. Taiko’s website does not try to hide the fact that the Extreme is a PC, so thumbs up to them for showing an honesty and openness that are often too rare in this industry.

The Extreme is an exquisitely well crafted machine (unlike many sub-$15K streamers that look like low-cost Chinese power supplies with front panels inscribed in goofy fonts). I certainly would not criticize an audiophile for spending $30,000 on a Taiko Extreme; I would probably own one myself if I were at a stage of my audio journey where it makes sense to spend that kind of money on a component.

Artistry, design and craftsmanship usually come a distant second, if at all, in Hi-Fi discussions, but sometimes they serve to make a price that would otherwise seem absurd, palatable.

@jimwsong1 If you've identified your speakers to be the weak link in your system, then why would you spend $4k on a DAC instead of new speakers?