I completely agree with the first part, I said several times that I agree a DAC can sound better fed from a DDC. What I said was .... your conclusion that it does so because it doesn’t have to work as hard or has to do less processing has no factual basis so stating that these are the reasons has no basis in fact…I never had any problem with the conclusion that it sounds better. My problem is your statement about WHY it sounds better.
@herman Ok, well fine then. If it’s not the better clocking and noise reduction that makes a DDC make a DAC sound better as both you and I agree that it does, then what exactly is it? Magic fairy dust??? C’mon man. You’re running outta logical options here. It’s either clocking, noise reduction, or magic fairy dust. And as to @sns contention that it’s mainly the i2S connection that’s absolutely bogus. Many people here have experienced significant sonic improvements using a DDC without using i2S, so that argument holds no water whatsoever. Your turn, and please add something tangible rather than it just has to be something magical and as yet unidentified that makes a DDC work other than clocking and noise reduction cause I’m all ears if you got it. Where is your magic WHY if better clocking and better noise reduction isn’t enough for you? Occam’s razor — the simplest (and most logical I’d offer) explanation is usually the best one, unless you have something else. I mean, what the hell else could it possibly be???
|
I run Ubuntu Linux on a $125 PC I got from Amazon. My music library is on a USB drive I hang off of it. Of course it can stream. Linux is free. The Clementine music player looks a lot like iTunes, but I run JRiver for about $30.
I always laugh at all of the people with their $5000 streamers and such. More money than sense.
|
@dcmnto - Paul Allen had absolutely zero to do with modern (or old) Windows. He left company (or, rather, was pushed out) long time ago. Never had any influence on OS design. Besides, since 25 years ago OS changed quite a bit.
|
I primarily use Windows desktop as a source, but occasionally Macbook as well. Streamer is just a computer. And I am pretty sure Apple gear is much better designed than some ARM Linux box.
|
DDC effectiveness generally with I2S, I2S input on many dacs allows local or host clocking, host or DDC clock may be superior to dac clock. I don't see the point of adding DDC for usb unless streamer usb really poor.
I agree with prior poster in regard to diy builds, many levels of performance depending on build.
How can you argue with people who claim to hear no difference with dedicated streamers vs multi purpose computers, they get to be happy without any extra expenditure. For those who've not heard a dedicated streamer in their system speak from experience rather than rehashing other's experiences.
|
there are plenty of references out there that will show DACs sound better when fed a higher quality signal with lower noise/jitter, which is largely what a DDC does. Just because you (or I) don’t understand exactly why that is the case doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, and the fact that both you and I (and scores of others here) have experienced positive benefits from adding a DDC is pretty darn good evidence that feeding a DAC a better signal has material benefits. If it’s not because the DAC works/sounds better with a lower noise/jitter signal from the DDC they why else would that possibly be?
I completely agree with the first part, I said several times that I agree a DAC can sound better fed from a DDC
What I said was .... your conclusion that it does so because it doesn't have to work as hard or has to do less processing has no factual basis so stating that these are the reasons has no basis in fact.
I never had any problem with the conclusion that it sounds better. My problem is your statement about WHY it sounds better.
As you alluded to, it really doesn't matter why as long as it does, so why do you keep defending the reasons you stated when they are indefensible especially when you agree you don't know why?
the end.
|
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?
@devinplombier Well, if they reduce noise and jitter, both of which are the well-known and proven enemies of good digital sound, why wouldn’t they sound different/better? What in the world is not logical about that??? IMO it’s completely illogical to think otherwise, so maybe — just maybe — there’s a good reason why so many “reasonable and reliable folks” find significant sonic differences. Hmmm. If you wanna call jitter/noise reduction “voicing” I guess that’s your prerogative, but I’d call that a misnomer.
|
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.
|
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?
|
The DAC is doing the exact same amount of processing whether the incoming signal has jitter or it doesn't. The DAC operates exactly the same either way. The DAC doesn't have a circuit that detects jitter or noise and then "does more work" when it detects it.
@herman I’m not going to go track down sources for this here and maybe someone else will chime in, but there are plenty of references out there that will show DACs sound better when fed a higher quality signal with lower noise/jitter, which is largely what a DDC does. Just because you (or I) don’t understand exactly why that is the case doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, and the fact that both you and I (and scores of others here) have experienced positive benefits from adding a DDC is pretty darn good evidence that feeding a DAC a better signal has material benefits. If it’s not because the DAC works/sounds better with a lower noise/jitter signal from the DDC they why else would that possibly be?
|
I use a fanless windows mini-pc (MS-6) designed for streaming from Hollis Audio Labs (I think i paid around $600 for it). Not sure how much was done with it, but it is leaps and bounds better than the (highly rated on ASR) raspberry pi design (with the reccomended "better" power source) that I replaced my Linn Majik dedicated streamer with.
I was very surprised at how good it sounded. The story I was told is that Paul Allen was a serious audiophile and besides money, one of his major contributions to the windows OS was demanding they got the sound right. My ears tell me there is some serious truth to that story.
The dac I am using is part of a dsp processor based (Danville dspNexus 2x8) on the AKM AK4493 DAC chip set, which until recently was considered the top of the line. This replaced my topping D90, which in it's own right is a pretty solid performer.
I agree that the DAC is very important if not the most important part of the equation, but how you stream counts as well. My experience/ears tells me that as far as computer streaming goes, Microsoft is the better performer over Linux and Apple.
Toss Roon in the mix with some room correction and there are many options for squeezing every last drop of performance out of whatever pc based or dedicated streaming device you landed on before moving on to the next level.
My$.02
|
I stream from a $180 Windows laptop using MusicBee through a Paradigm preamp using PlayFi on one system and through an SMSL DAC on another. However, I stream through an Amazon Echo to those same devices 90% of the time. Bits are bits. I don't worry about how they get there and as far as the jitter argument, the data is buffered and any jitter measures far below the capability of the human ear to notice it.
|
When a DDC sends a signal to a DAC that has reduced jitter and noise from the USB signal the DAC has much less processing to do.
.. "much less processing to do" is just like "do less work to clean up the incoming signal"
The DAC is doing the exact same amount of processing whether the incoming signal has jitter or it doesn't. The DAC operates exactly the same either way. The DAC doesn't have a circuit that detects jitter or noise and then "does more work" when it detects it.
Again, I use a DDC so I'm not pushing back on the idea that they can improve the outcome, I'm just saying your explanations about how that happens make no sense.
At the end of the day I realize my concerns don't really matter, how it sounds matters, but as someone with a background in electronics, it just bothers me when people offer explanations about how electronic circuits work when they really don't understand them.
so I'll let it be
|
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.
+1000, the same group think continues to prevail no matter how many different ways you try to explain it.
A audio optimized PC is actually quite easy to build....
a) Ya look up tomshardware for the different power supply (PSU) reviews/measurements and it is fairly easy to downselect one optimized for audio.
b) A high quality itx motherboard
c) Any Ryzen APU/integrated graphics chip
d) Drop them in a case...there are several htpc cases that are literally made with the form factor of a stereo component.
All of it for less than a 1000 bucks easily...(instead of dropping 10k for a goofy streamer). Load up the OS and sky’s the limit with free reign on any kind of software one could use, user friendliness, multitasking, etc. There is an enormous amt of nformation from the PC nerds out there about how to drop the noise to nothing (which I am sure is what the 20k streamer manufacturers read religiously as well)
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 need to start "manufacturing" high end streamers in my garage and sell them for 20k a piece to our beloved audiophiles!
|
What does "do less work to clean up the incoming signal" even mean? What work is being done? The statement actually makes no sense.
@herman When a DDC sends a signal to a DAC that has reduced jitter and noise from the USB signal the DAC has much less processing to do. That’s the whole point of a DDC (along with providing more connection options) and what makes a DAC sound better. What about that doesn’t make sense to you?
|
Adding a DDC can provide a better signal to a DAC, and even a DAC with a good clock benefits and sounds better by having to do less work to clean up the incoming signal.
I do use a DDC (Mutec MC3 + clock) and I do hear a small improvement, but the second part about why is purely a guess. You have no way to know why it sounds better.
What does "do less work to clean up the incoming signal" even mean? What work is being done? The statement actually makes no sense.
|
@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.
|
I use a Mac mini, with Audirvana, USB-out into a Gold Note DS-10. Everything sounds good. I haven't noticed any ground loops, noise or any other intrusions, but then again my current noisefloor on my amps isn't 100% silent and may be drowning out some tiny digital interference.
I wouldn't mind experimnenting with throwing a DDC into the chain but I haven't yet.
|
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.
@devinplombier My experience along with many others here is a bit different. Adding a DDC can provide a better signal to a DAC, and even a DAC with a good clock benefits and sounds better by having to do less work to clean up the incoming signal. Further, if your DAC accepts i2S and the DDC allows you to take advantage of that input the DAC is also freed from having to separate the clock from the data signal that can also provide significant sonic benefits. I’d bet there are very few DACs that wouldn’t benefit in one way or another from a good DDC and is likely even more true if you’re feeding a DAC from a non-optimized, multi-use computer. I’d encourage anyone with a DAC to at least try a DDC as it can be a relatively cost-effective way to provide very meaningful improvements. That was very much my experience anyway.
|
I use Audirvāna to play files up to 256 DSD on a recent model Mac Mini with SSD drive and 8 GB memory, stripped down just for music. It feeds a PS Audio Directstream DAC via usb thru an I2S unit. I have tried the Pro-Ject Stream Box, which gets rave reviews, and returned it pronto. I auditioned a Bluesound Node, and was not impressed. I do use the Bridge II card in the DAC to stream Qobuz and can’t hear a difference from CDs or Redbook files on my Magnepan .7s fed by a Rogue Sphinx. While a member of my local audio club says he thinks streamers can make as much difference as DACs, I have to think you need to get into a $$$ range streamer to get an appreciable difference.
|
And here we go....... again
If you search the internet you will find at least 1000 threads discussing this exact same question. You will find that they all contain the exact same information, in fact, some of the same people here are posting the same things over there.
One side side says there is a night and day difference in streamers. The other side says it makes absolutely no difference. A few people are in the middle
If you go to Audiophile Style you will find a group that has invested near $100,000 (yes one hundred thousand american dollars) in streaming computers, 10’s of $1000’s in cables, power supplies, clocks, reclockers for USB and ethernet and multiples of those. They also upsample everything to 16-32 X the base rate They swear it is all necessary to achieve the best.
others use a $100 Raspberry Pi and claim the same results
so here is the answer to your question... read it carefully
You will never find the answer here or on any forum. The ONLY way to determine the answer for YOU is for YOU to try it.
so all you all can just move along, nothing new to see here. There is NOTHING anybody can add to this conversation that isn't posted in 1000 other threads here and elsewhere
|
Why ask this to a group that uses usb to the dac? The sound is already compromised by using usb.
What do you think your streamer is? It’s a computer running probably a tainted Linux version. You think Linux is better than OS X? Try again. Some manufacturers think by eliminating all diagnostics from the OS it will run better. This might have been true 40 years ago but with today’s arm processors running trillions of operations a second (15.8 trillion operations for an older Apple M2 processor), you won’t see any difference.
If you use the computer in a different room from your audio, you will not hear any difference. You would be better off getting a better dac that doesn’t use usb.
The software you run on the computer makes the biggest difference after you stop using usb. Download Roon or audirvana and run it on a computer running a flavor of OS to your liking and you will hear differences between the software. Audirvana was better than Roon but Roon has caught up but I just can’t accept going backwards using the gui of Audirvana over Roon
|
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.
|
Streamers or computers absolutely benefit from a DDC or reclocker USB to DDC input., for even with a small LPS power supply from a streamer ,it’s not as good as even a basic $550 DDC , the better ones even have Oven clocks ,which are better then in most dacs and if possible run I2S cable for the best signal input .
|
|
@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!
|
And yet, one of audio's long-time reviewers (Srajan Ebaen with 6moons) uses an iMac as his source in his main system. Of course he has add-ons, such as an outboard SSD, Singxer SU-6 DDC, and LHY Audio switch, but still. He recently used that source when reviewing the 20,000 euro Cube Audio Lotus 10 speakers.
To the OP, I suggest you try Holo Audio's Red DDC/Streamer for $800. You can first try it as a DDC between your MacBook and DAC, and then maybe as a stand-alone streamer. If you use Roon, you could try running Roon core on your MacBook and Roon Ready player on the Red, as a streamer. Later, if you choose to add a server, you could try one of the SGC models or one from Roon, run it on your network, and use the Red as your streamer. Even if you eventually upgrade to a better streamer, or a server/streamer, the Red is one of the better measuring DDCs that offers both galvanic isolation and reclocking prior to your DAC. It also outputs I2S in the event you purchase a DAC with that type of input. The Singxer SU-6 DDC is also good but the ability to use the Red as a streamer also may make that a better deal for you. Lots of versatility and something that could make an immediate positive improvement, without changing out your MacBook, for only $800.
|
@soix ,
but how many people here who are audiophiles and not computer techs are qualified or are willing to undertake such a project
When I posted a response last night, I wanted to indicate that without being disrespectful to others or hurting people’s egos. I think you put it perfectly. In my case, I would rather take my car to a shop to get an oil change and brakes done. But some of my friends do it themselves.
@devinplombier , you are right - a purpose built PC can be upgraded as needed and will either equal or surpass a dedicated streamer. I have reached out to multiple folks on audiophile style and there are a quite a few who switched to making their own server and running HQPlayer up-sampling everything to DSD 256 and higher. These folks are extremely pleased with the results. I want to try HQPlayer myself and hear what is the difference between DSD512 coming our of Foobar Vs HQPlayer. I am eyeing a used T+A DAC200, since new ones are beyond my budget :-(. But will do this in a couple of months.
|
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.
|
I use an old MBAir as a media server. I do have a usb to a DAC if I want to listen to my digital (lossless) crap through my analog system, but I rarely bother.
|
@devinplombier That’s probably true, but how many people here who are audiophiles and not computer techs are qualified or are willing to undertake such a project?!? C’mon man, be real. Sometimes things are just worth paying for.
like the old motorcyclist adage :
"Ducati , making mechanics out of motorcyclist for a 100 years"
|
I used to use a MacBook as my streaming source; changed to an Eversolo A6 about a year ago, which was far superior; I'll upgrade that eventually, too.
|
Here’s another voice in the dark that at first used a MacBook, then a Bluesound .....great place to start .. hint hint) and then a better streamer and DAC. My wife who could give a rat’s behind care about all of this also noticed the improvements. Cabling and a clean ethernet matter too. In other words far better SQ can be had away from ye old lappy. You will get what you pay for.
|
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.
@devinplombier That’s probably true, but how many people here who are audiophiles and not computer techs are qualified or are willing to undertake such a project?!? C’mon man, be real. Sometimes things are just worth paying for.
|
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.
Or, get a Bluesound Node, LPS and nice cables, feed it to a good tube DAC (with really good NOS tubes) and be done and happy for ~$3K (+ $11 a month for Qobuz and SXM for free if you have SXM in your car) - and a nice app to control it all from every phone and tablet in the house.
|
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.
|
@randywong ,
I suggest that you read dCS Guide to Computer Audio.
A laptop is probably not ideal. But if you can build a desktop (especially a fanless) with minimal components. For the initial build you can have wireless, blue-tooth, and other stuff. But once the desktop in finally configured remove them physically and also disable the controls in BIOS. Of course, you have to have interest (drive), to make your audio server, which is not only a wonderful experience, but can also sound great. You can then have dedicated players like Foobar or HQPlayer or others to play music. Audiophilestyle forum has ton of people who are enjoying their high end setups with purpose built servers. Point is that I would certainly NOT dismiss computer audio for playback in a high fidelity system. And I just noted a few others that are in agreement with that.
If that is not what interests you, then the streamers suggested above are probably the way to go.
|
@oberoniaomnia
"Could it be that the DAC in the streamer is better than what you used when using a computer as file source?"
I have owned multiple streamers, from folks like Metrum, Antipodes, Sonore, Mojo Audio, and Small Green Computer, and some of those were server/streamers, but I have never owned a streamer/DAC combination. The combination of a DAC within a streamer, or server/streamer, is not unheard of but also not common with the equipment used by most on this forum.
There is a lot to unpack here, and the OP should really do more research on this site, as well as looking at offerings by manufacturers, just to see what is out there. If they need file storage, then they may need a server since many streamers do not offer storage. If they want to run Roon, they will need something to operate Roon Core. A computer will do those things, as will a server, but not all streamers. So, questions include:
- do they need storage for their own music files or do they simply want to stream from the internet,
- how do they plan to interface with their music, i.e., using Roon, or other platforms,
- is this a first step toward an overall digital playback system that they intend to grow, or are they looking for a one and done solution, and
- what is their budget and time frame?
There is no roadmap for exactly how to get there but it does help to start with the end in mind.
|
@devinplombier
The BDP-3 is largely a computer but one that is built specifically to do one thing. Stream Music and great pains are taken to maximize SQ.
|
|
|
Several friends suggested I compare my Aurender N20 server to Audirvana. I listened for 30 days, going back and forth, and eventually selected Audirvana running on a MAC computer as sounding better in MY system.
“Audirvana offers a 30-day free trial for both Audirvāna Studio and Audirvāna Origin, allowing users to experience its features WITHOUT requiring a credit card The trial provides unlimited access to Audirvāna’s exclusive core player technology and compatibility with Apple Silicon, Windows 11, and Linux”.
I use Audirvana running on my Apple Laptop Computer 12-Core CPU 19-Core GPU 16GB Unified Memory 1TB SSD Storage. Audirvana outputs the signal to my Bricasti M21 DAC using an Ethernet cable. The Audirvana interface is very easy to use and I had no issues moving from the Aurender Conductor App to the Audirvana. My sound quality is excellent.
I asked Perplexity AI how Audirvana manages the MAC computer for sound quality. Please see the response below.
===================================
"Audirvana enhances sound quality on a Mac by effectively managing the macOS Core Audio API, optimizing audio playback, and reducing computer noise. It preloads music files into memory and converts them to PCM to avoid on-the-fly conversion, which can improve performance. Users can further enhance sound quality by adjusting settings such as DAC configurations, playback pre-load buffer RAM allocation, and minimizing background operations. Audirvana’s exclusive audio access also contributes to improved dynamic range, deeper bass, and sharper highs compared to other players.
Audirvana is often noted for providing clearer high-frequency sound compared to Roon. Users report that Audirvana enhances the separation and detail of high frequencies, resulting in a sharper and more dynamic listening experience. This improvement is attributed to Audirvana’s ability to optimize audio playback by reducing noise and improving dynamic range, which can make high frequencies sound more distinct and less blended compared to Roon.
Audirvana manages a Mac computer for optimal sound quality by utilizing several techniques. It provides exclusive audio access to minimize interference from other system sounds, which enhances clarity and dynamic range. Audirvana supports DSP functions like volume leveling and sample-rate conversion, although it lacks built-in EQ features; users can install plugins for additional DSP capabilities. The software also allows for detailed DAC settings, including oversampling adjustments, to tailor the sound output further. These features collectively contribute to a more refined and precise audio experience on a MAC".
==========================================
This is a complicated decision and there is no right or wrong answer. I suggest to anyone asking this question is to audition several solutions and pick that one that sounds the best in YOUR System.
|
|
|
Here is the inside of a $4,000 Bryston BDP-3 audiophile streamer. Computer aficionados will be familiar with much of the componentry.
![]()
|
Could it be that the DAC in the streamer is better than what you used when using a computer as file source? So what you are hearing is not computer vs streamer, but different DACs.
I’m not going to say this is total garbage  , but it indicates very low knowledge about what is going on here. Most of the high end streamers most are referring to here do not have built in DAC’s, so no that is not what we are hearing.
Even if you don’t like Winer,
But what this guy says is total garbage. I didn’t read this article but from some posts I have read from Winer previously, anyone who claims cabling doesn’t make a difference is not an audiophile. Winer, just like ASR proponents, if people do the exact opposite of the advice given from them you will most likely get better sound. If someone built a system using a batch of "not recommended" components I bet it would sound pretty good. 
|
@yyzsantabarbara appreciate sharing your observations. Would you mind sharing which streamers they were?
|
@illusionista8 When I had 3 streamers in the house, $2k, $3k, and $15k. I tested them out side by side and found they sounded different, which was surprising. However, I would not say 1 streamer was better than the other.
|
Useful information here.
What I picked up reading through this thread:
- noticeable sound improvement is due to DAC
- noticeable sound improvement with streamer only at certain price range (ex. Aurender, etc)
- lower priced streamer advantage is mostly for convenience
|
Been using portable PC ever since I first saw and heard dedicated music streamers and the horrendous price demanded for the streamer or any options such as additional memory expanding HDDs.
I figured a streamer was only a "custom built" PC that automated the chores required to rip and then read digital files either from a server or the internet. Using a Windows PC is inexpensive and does a fine job if paired with a good DAC. I use a Mojo with a good, but not overly expensive, 3mm to RCA "jobber" cable connected to Anthem amplifier with Focal speakers. The results are very good, surprising even, and very affordable.
It remains a basic yet very good way to start "streaming" and maybe, heaven forbid, even remain at that level of sound quality (many would be surprised at what can be done affordably). The money saved can be spent acquiring a sizable CD collection from garage, yard sales and flea markets (remember, for the price of one or two purchased tunes one can get a lot of used, but still readable, CDs at... CD quality !).
The other, often overlooked, benefit is access to a world (literally) of music through internet radio thereby enhancing your musical knowledge and enjoyment. These albeit "low res" foreign radio station discoveries are priceless and allow me to refine my "flea market bin" searches.
Remember it is always about enjoying the music and the WAF concerning overall budget outlay is invaluable and not to be neglected...;-)
|
