Better DAC or better Streamer

I would upgrade both.  Any Lampi product you can afford and Lucas Audio MS.  I found the Lucas Audio MS made an incredible difference in my system.

What are you looking to achieve with the upgrade?   Hard to make any recommendation without knowing.

Probably, since you’re asking, it is only a question of which you upgrade first.  I’d say go for the streamer first and then get that signal as clean as possible and if you’re still not happy, go for the DAC. I noticed a huge improvement when I went to a Grimm MU1, connected via Ethernet cable, with the cable running through DX Engineering ISO-PLUS Ethernet RF Filters and using Puron power filters in the same outlet as the router.  There was no audible difference between the MU1 and SACD.  The cool thing about Grimm’s DACs is that they give the ability to up sample to either 2x or 4x.  To my ears, it doesn’t get much better than the 4x up sampling.  Links to the filters are below:  

https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-iso-plus-2?srsltid=AfmBOoqNt2mAvvVq9e-uoloXY2x0rsNUwqENt5oeOX8jVwxFjIpgkZzL

https://positive-feedback.com/reviews/hardware-reviews/puron-ac-power-conditioner/

Happy listening! 

No matter what you upgrade, DAC or streamer, you will get an improvement in sound quality. However in your case @eddy1 you will have a bottleneck in your streamer and you will be upgrading it soon after. The SP2000 is similar to streaming with iPad - there’s plenty of room for improvement there. 

DAC

Since the original questioner asked what would be the better upgrade, I believe it to be by any measure the DAVE DAC. It leaves some space for enjoyable experimentation to try a couple well regarded inexpensive streamers, some mid price and one or two "High End" ones. Hear for yourself via a resolving high quality DAC and make your own mind up.

I would just qualify the answer I gave as assuming you would be looking to use a standalone streamer with the DAVE, if not then of course, moving from a DAP to a decent streamer is the first option

I suppose you could make the same argument for any solid state or a tube amplifier then, yes? So once someone gets to that 2-3K level, there are no further benefits to be had?

Yes I agree on the face of it, we could make that comparison/ argument but it would be a flawed one. When you consider what a streamer does in the chain, there are profound differences between the function of a Tube or SS amp in how their internal components reproduce the signal. A streamer goes nowhere near a music signal, it just hands off a stream of data its collected from a server.

Please forgive me following my maybe flawed or inadequate knowledge, but an amplifier is quite a different animal in a audio reproduction chain.(e.g) I suppose you could define it as the pre-amp and or power amp is processing the actual music and where as the streamer is collecting one’s and zeros.

For instance, of course you will know, in a push pull, transformer driven tube amplifier, there are many differences and quality indicators apparent when using better components, such as quality driver and power tubes which have an undeniable measurable and audible impact, if say a tube amp is capacitor coupled, the choice of cap’s and values will both profoundly affect the sound quality and signature, and there are more we could add and therefore there is a logical correlation between components ad sound quality, although many high end brands milk it by applying snake oil prices to HIFi gear more generally.

I have always thought of streamers as not even powerful PC’s, but as packet receivers, running bespoke software to allow us humans to understand the recompiled files via a rudimentary GUI.

For the uninitiated of which there are probably not many on our forum, so I will keep it respectfully short. When we select a track to play, the streamer communicates with the streaming service’s server to request the music file, the music file is transmitted from the server to the streamer in small units called data packets. Each packet contains a portion of the music file along with information about how to reassemble the data

The streamer simply receives these packets and reassembles them into a continuous stream of digital audio data. Just like a PC. this process is managed via industry standard protocols such as TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and IP (Internet Protocol), which ensure that packets are delivered in the correct order and without errors. It then says over to you "DAVE" turn this little lot into music and that’s all the streamer does.

What it does is very well known in the computing world and the internet does send data packets at a staggering rate, approaching 0.5 zettabytes daily and all pretty much with extremely low error rates.

The streamer is then a after-all, just a singe application a focused but less noisy PC Its not even a "source" using the definition we all understand, It isn’t an all rounder it has but has but one job, collect data and pass it to a DAC.

So I find it incomprehensible to speculate that a streamer can have as much or as some have said more influence of the systems Sonic’s as a DAC.

If it’s not data compiling or error correction that defines its "better" sound as they all do that job and the as part of the defined internet protocols or its not a special "buffer"circuit, is it processor and or RAM speed? If someone has the answers I would genuinely, really like to know how..

As I have said I believe there are better ways to build streamers as some brands do very well but only to a point. As long as they collect compile and hand off like they should and noise is controlled, why would we expect anything more other than fancy App’s and or GUI’s or billet aluminium chassis etc..

@soix

So the OP is using a DAP as a streamer right now. I don’t know but I would ask if it is galvanically isolated, does it suppress jitter, and how good is the power supply? These things are material, and I’d be hard pressed to think it compares to a good dedicated streamer when all these important aspects are considered. I have found that streamers matter a lot, and it just seems like using a DAP as a streaming source for something like a DAVE or any other DAC on that level is a pretty big mismatch. Just my opinion.

I was of the same opinion, and since then @ghdprentice stated this above;

I’ve used all of these through my main system which has a good DAC. The A&K (A&K SP2000) is a joke in comparison to either of the Aurenders...

Our similar opinions seem to have been verified: Proof is in the pudding as they say, assuming the SP2000 is cut from the same streaming cloth as the SP3000.

So the OP is using a DAP as a streamer right now.  I don’t know but I would ask if it is galvanically isolated, does it suppress jitter, and how good is the power supply?  These things are material, and I’d be hard pressed to think it compares to a good dedicated streamer when all these important aspects are considered.  I have found that streamers matter a lot, and it just seems like using a DAP as a streaming source for something like a DAVE or any other DAC on that level is a pretty big mismatch.  Just my opinion. 

@nubiann 

So I get that a dedicated box is the way to go but beyond the use of a decent power supply, utilizing a well thought out circuit designed to reduce noise and populated by good components, there appears to be little opportunity for sonic improvement in employing super expensive esoteric components etc.

I suppose you could make the same argument for any solid state or a tube amplifier then, yes? So once someone gets to that 2-3K level, there are no further benefits to be had? 

@eddy1 Here is another couple of curve balls: 

First curve ball: whether you upgrade DAC or not: 

Not sure if you just stream direct or if you play files, but if it is the latter this may be worth a read. I admit I am not that computer "tweaky", it takes lots of time to convert and upsample local files, and my DAC is not conducive to higher bit rate files, but this software was developed for the Chord products as they love upsampled files. There is a list of other DAC's that work well with the software. 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/62699-a-toast-to-pggb-a-heady-brew-of-math-and-magic/#comment-1126311

https://www.remastero.com/pggb.html#dacs

Second curve ball: upgrade to a different DAC? 

Another few comments to digest that I have read lately comparing Gustard DAC's to Dave DAC: The first is from that thread above from an owner of both, and the second is from a review of the latest Gustard, but he also owns the Dave: 

"Not much help but I had no issues with the Gustard driver on Windows (build 1903) or Linux, 768/705k worked great and sounded sweeter. Really excellent dac - and not just "for the money". As I've said elsewhere, if I didn't have the Dave, I'd be happy with the Gustard X26pro. "

"I’ll say it right from the start that the X30 is exactly as resolving as the Chord DAVE and exactly as fast and impactful sounding.....In layman’s terms, X30 can do proper justice to live music, big orchestras, and classical masterpieces. And I’m not exaggerating a single bit. The biggest surprise came when the naked Chord DAVE (without the M Scaler) was connected to the same Rockna Wavedream NET via USB and in no time the size of the room felt smaller. The sounds were no longer free and unhindered as they were on the X30. The DAVE didn’t quite live up to its name (Digital to Analog Veritas in Extremis) projecting a shier, flatter, and smaller image in front of me. The X30 on the other hand, sounded exactly how a properly engineered DAC should perform....While it doesn’t outplay the Wavedream Signature, it again outplays the Chord DAVE when it comes to the force behind the bass. When it needs to impress and add a higher sound pressure level, it would do that more impressively. I would never call the DAVE lacking energy in here, but that’s what I’m thinking about when I’m comparing these two... the X30 with its overkill quad mono design brought forward the lost layers of resolution. I can’t differentiate it from my $18.000 Wavedream Signature or $14.000 Chord DAVE in terms of how much nuance there is. Is it as resolving, clean, and transparent? Yes!"

For the price of the Dave you could buy the Gustard X30 and the Nagra and have $6000 left over.

The Gustard is available direct or through Amazon- try it for 30 days, compare to the Hugo and return it if isn't better (?) 

I stress these are my own opinions and experiences and would in no way seek to diminish the experience of others who can justify the additional expense.

I can understand that streamers are not all the same but we may have a situation here, where once you reach a yet to be determined sweet spot there will be little sonic value in spending more. My question is; has the diminishing returns argument ever appeared more appropriate than applied to the realm of the streamer?

I guess I am suggesting that a streamer is a relatively simple machine that can be implemented at many levels. I recall using a PC in the past but software and noise were always an issue. So I get that a dedicated box is the way to go but beyond the use of a decent power supply, utilizing a well thought out circuit designed to reduce noise and populated by good components, there appears to be little opportunity for sonic improvement in employing super expensive esoteric components etc.

So short of the aesthetic and case work being pleasing on the eye and having a psychological feel good factor, it leaves GUI and software to consider, do you need a screen what services are available on the platform is their software upgraded regularly etc.

However for me, paying beyond a certain price/quality point for a standalone streamer is simply wasted money that could return more sonic bangs for the buck elsewhere, Namely the Chord Company DAVE DAC.

There is a school that suggests 30% Streamer and 70% DAC. Based on some recent listening in my system, I am going to stick my neck out and suggest as high as 20/80 Streamer to DAC could well be appropriate.

Now where this ceiling is with streamers has never been easy to determine and no one seems to be able to suggest a price beyond which there is no discernible sonic benefit.

Since the original questioner asked what would be the better upgrade, I believe it to be by any measure the DAVE DAC. It leaves some space for enjoyable experimentation to try a couple well regarded inexpensive streamers, some mid price and one or two "High End" ones. Hear for yourself via a resolving high quality DAC and make your own mind up.

.

The dac100%  for a streamer is just bringing the signal in 

the Dac or sourse most important part of the audio chain .

the higher quality the better ,this is the end point where the signal goes down stream to all other components before reaching the Loudspeakers .

once a signal is sent good or bad it cannot be improved upon later this is why 

is is crucial for the fidelity of your audio system. The streamer is important also 

but it does-not do the final Digital to Analog conversion .

@audphile1 and everyone

Sorry I didn’t make it clear to everyone.

Yes, I will keep using M Scaler.

How close is Hugo TT2 with Mscaler to the sound of DAVE?

Are you looking to continue using Mscaler with DAVE or are you giving up the Chord combo to move up to DAVE and planning on using the DAVE without Mscaler?

If you plan on running DAVE by itself then I would probably say get a proper streamer and keep your TT2/Mscaler combo.

If your upgrade is DAVE/Mscaler combo then probably go that route and add a streamer later.

Thank you Thank you Thank you for everyone input.  

Spend $2k less and get the PBD lower end streamer which seems like the same as the Nagra. Mostly likely because Nagra licensed it from PBD.

A fibre cable did not sound the same with 2 of 3 fibre streamers that I had at the same time. The Lumin X1 and OpticalRendu were fibre optical, and the Playback Designs was SPDIF in my test (though it supported fibre). All were great but very different sounding.

@mclinnguy

I have a A&K SP2000 DAP and an Aurender N100 (10 pounds) and an Aurender W20SE (46 pounds). I actually like talking weight. It isn’t there just for looks and is a pretty reliable indicator of sound quality. 

I’ve used all of these through my main system which has a good DAC. The A&K is a joke in comparison to either of the Aurender... obviously I have the W20SE because its sound quality justifies its cost.

@yyzsantabarbara

There was someone comparing my $3k PBD streamer to the $13k or $20k PBD streamer and they could not tell the difference.

And then there was someone who demoed/compared the Antipodes streamers with Aries Cerat DAC’s.

His results were that the Oladra with the Aries Cerat Helene was preferred to the Antipodes K50 with the Aries Cerat Kassandra.

So the pricier streamer with the (cheap ) $19,000 DAC was better to his ears than the cheaper streamer with the $60,000 DAC.

I have read this more than once: some people have heard significantly greater differences with high end music servers than they have with high end dacs. That is once one gets to a certain level the diminishing returns are more quick with Dacs than they are with music servers.

And no, a fiber connection does not make streamers sound the same.

As evidenced by the answers in this thread there is no way to know. There is probably a slim chance you can review both yourself in your own system to compare I would wager? 

Having said that I then went and looked up this Astell & Kern thingy. That little portable player is how much? 

Going to ramble on with some of my thoughts: 

You can stream with that little portable A&K thingy, or you can stream with something like my streamer, which has a mass of 42 lbs. Logically how could this little thingy serve up files with the same sonic clarity as a huge dedicated box with 2 computers and massive power supply capabilities? 

Using the same logic, the Nagra is also a dedicated box designed to just do the same thing: serve/stream music files, so I don't think the A&K thingy has a chance to sound as good. The Nagra streamer is just 4 lbs- but that doesn't include the outboard power supply- is that a wal wart? notably one can upgrade its power supply- no idea how much that is and it is probably so new there are no reviews of that. But if one just needs that: to stream using Tidal/Spotify connect that is a nice, small, discrete, and attractive looking streamer, (mine isn't as shelf friendly) it may be a great choice. Nagra has a stellar reputation for top notch sonics, and Swiss (like my DAC) made quality. One review I just glanced at puts it above Lumin U2 mini for sound quality, but is should as it is twice the money, and Huff is drooling over it, probably because with a good review he can keep their $30k DAC longer...

I don't know- there are plenty of great streamers for the same amount of money, and that is before upgrading the power supply $$$ but the possibility of upgrades is appealing. 

End of rambling. 

No doubt the DAVE will eclipse the HUGO TT2, but to answer your question: which will upgrade your sound quality more? my money is on the Nagra- without a doubt. 

Thank you.

DAC without question.

One’s conclusion on Aurender’s Conductor app may be highly dependent on when you used it. They did a major upgrade about six to nine months ago. Not a spectacularly smooth transition. But is solidified and now far more powerful than the earlier version... and it is getting even better daily,

There are plenty of good streamers out there but finding one with decent software is a challenge. Many people recommend Aurender but in my experience while the SQ is excellent the conductor software is lacking. I finally settled on Antipodes with Squeeze software which is adequate but far from perfect. I'm looking forward to Qobuz Connect which again while not perfect would be a step in the right direction. But to address the question I believe the DAC will have more impact on SQ than the streamer. DACs can sound significantly different and I would not limit myself to Chord and would try as many as possible within your price range.

Better DAC ! Cause through a DAC you could run several different sources like a streamer. 

We are a chord dealer  and   we sell the remarkable 432evo servers

that is a hard decision in our experience a really good server streamer can make a very noticeable improvement in musicality.

Dave and Troy

Audio Intellect NJ

Chord dealer and 432evo servers dealers 

System dependent. I've heard discernible differences between DACs and music servers. 

Thank you everyone.

I certainly depends on the sound character you want to change. If I had your system, I would want a more musical and natural sounding DAC. The DAC is likely to have a bigger change on the sonic character. The streamer will lower the noise floor, increase  dynamics and detail.

In streaming as with all audio the chain is only as strong as the weakest link, and in your case the DAP is by far the weakest link so get thee a good dedicated streamer.  You already have a good DAC, but using a DAP as a streamer in a high-end system???  No…just, no. 

DAC hands down.  I have a Chord Dave and it is huge.  I also have the Farad power supply for it.  I am not using mine now as I have gone Tube with Lampizator but in the AB the DAVE held it's own

Jerry

I believe the Nagra streamer is the same as the PlayBack Designs streamer that I had. The low end one for $3k. The Nagra DAC is also a PBD DAC design but with different boards than in the PBD DACs Andreas Koch of PBD mentioned the DACs in an interview and I read something about the stream online.

DAC for sure. There was someone comparing my $3k PBD streamer to the $13k or $20k PBD streamer and they could not tell the difference. Most likely because fibre was involved. PLINK in the PBD case but you can use something like a OpticalRendu for similar non-proprietary results.

Streamer 

Streamer