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

Audiogon Discussion Forum

The best and better performing dedicated streamers outperform any known consumer over the counter computer including cost-no-object Mac.  Search results on this subject including appropriate AB tests supports this opinion and I've never seen any reliable information to contradict it.  

Under my definition for best and better streamers I include a custom DIY based on Amazon's Mele computer (about $1k,) the Resonessence Fluvius (RIP, last SRP about $1700,) the current Infigo IS-1 ($5k and $7k versions,) the $20k Antipodes K50 and $30k Taiko Extreme.  I own the first 3 streamers listed; a person I know well in Europ AB tested the Mele/Antipodes/Extreme.  The Mele takes considerable knowledge to assemble and run.  The Fluvius is Android based with let's just say not-ideal library function (one of the main reasons it sounds so good is because it's not Mac nor Windows.)   I'd exclude Aurender models @ $12k and below.  

Correction: As I posted above, I changed my mind about using the MAC Laptop for streaming.

A $5,000 SRP Infigo Audio IS-1 Signature streamer replaced my MAC Book Pro dedicated for music streaming only. Both streamers have Audirvana Studio music player installed. Audirvana Remote is installed on my Apple iPad.

Audirvana Studio enhances audio quality on computers by optimizing the operating system for audio playback and disabling non-essential services. It functions as a third-party player, scanning local music libraries and integrating streaming services like Tidal and Qobuz, but not Spotify or Apple Music. Audirvana offers both subscription and lifetime license models.

The Infigo Audio IS-1 streamer has substantially improved my sound quality. I immediately noticed my system sounds much better. The music is clearer, bass is more powerful, and imaging has improved. My Signature model lists for $5,000 and the Cryogen model is $7,000. The INFIGO IS-1 Streamer is highly recommended.

I am using a laptop via high-b/w USB into Cambridge DAC/Pre directly into my monoblocks, and I am unsure if this can get any better than listening to 24/196 lossless music. The limitation is the resolution availability of music across Tidal, Apple, and Amazon, which can only provide up to 24/196 lossless files (max for 99% of the music). Maybe they will get to 392 in the future.

I think it may have more to do with how good the output stage of your DAC and the DAC converters are vs. the stream source. It is going 1’s and 0s from the machine to the DAC, and then the DAC converts it to analog, so I would think the DAC’s output stage, along with the DAC itself, is 99% of the sound.

I am running a laptop with an SSD drive and nothing running but the Apple Music app, feeding Cambridge DAC/PRE with full TaraOne interconnects balanced into the amps with TarOne into the speakers via 6’ cables. Linn Klimax 500 solo monos with Cambridge 851C Azur DAC/Pre. My weak link seems to be my speakers.

So, the question is, should I spend $4k on a top-of-the-line Cambridge music server or just use what I have set up? Or should I go with a dedicated music server instead of streaming via the computer to the DAC? Also, I can stream all lossless via iPad set at lossless to the DAC via Wi-Fi.

Linn also makes a great DAC/PRE... again, the output stage matching with the amplifier input, along with DAC.  I think finding the best matching DAC/PRE/AMP is where 99% of the sound from digital is at.

@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?