Bluesound Node versions SQ

I’d price out buying a used Node and a LPS, but compare that (and risks involved in tearing into it unless you have a little electronics experience) with just buying the Node 132 for $549 and being done with it. It has a better power supply per Bluesound to the point that you don’t need to futz about trying to add a LPS.

And as others mentioned, if you are going to use an external DAC, look to the new $299 Node Nano. According to some reviewers, it has better inherent sound quality than the Node 130 and Node X did (using the onboard DAC).

I’m not a flat earther, but the more research I have done over the last 5 years into all this mess, is that yeah, people on Youtube always say "buy price commensurate gear" so you aren’t leaving performance on the table. Well, maybe. But when it comes to streamers, if they are doing their job, you likely won’t hear a snail’s toes difference in SQ between them when feeding an external DAC and if you have the external DAC doing the buffering and reclocking of the data stream. One bone of contention some encounter among streamers (and DACs) is that some of them might be applying some "magical fairy dust" in DSP to the data stream. And yeah, your ears *might* prefer that fairy dust sound.

At the end of the day, get the best streamer you can that has an easy to use and reliable software user interface, feed it into your external DAC and enjoy the music.

All those on YouTube continually say that a $4K streamer sounds better than a $300 one when feeding an external DAC, but none of them, not even Hans Beekhuyzen, with his oscilloscope prop in the background, can show any data as to why that is. Guess stuff that cost more just always sounds better. I’ll sell you a Raspberry Pi for $8000 if you are so inclined. Wink, wink.

@soix I’m an engineer. Show me the money (measurements). If I send a data stream of 01001101 and another streamer does the same to the exact same external DAC, and that external DAC is doing buffering and reclocking of the data stream such that jitter is not an issue, there should be no difference whatsoever. If someone says it sounds better, can they pass a double-blind test where all factors are controlled to within 0.001dB? I never see them do this or attempt it. Might make a great reality game show don’t you think?

The key is are they really passing the same data or not? Is one applying some DSP? I don’t have the digital measuring equipment, but I’d sure like ASR to get some and settle this issue once and for all. Is it real, or a placebo effect?

@soix don't shoot the messenger. I'm merely asking a technical "why?". I also believe the old axiom that a fool and his money are soon parted if they aren't at least a bit skeptical. I'm not arguing with you or anyone else on DACs. They obviously have sonic characteristics because at the end of the chain, they are analog devices, with design choices made to give the best sound at any price point.

But I'm simply not sold on "mere" transports being all that different.  Either they should be passing the correct data stream or they aren't. There's no middle ground when it comes to digital - or at least there shouldn't be.

So, if there is, (and many on here say there is) there inherently should be some way of measuring that and seeing why. That's all I'm asking for. A valid engineering answer to the "why?"

And just as important for manufacturers would be understanding that "why" and applying it to their own products.  A black box is a black box. Applying a time domain transfer function to one box should be able to make it sound very nearly identical to the other one and do so for perhaps less money.  

Bob Carver did this decades ago with some of his amplifiers and all the audiophiles agreed, his amp sounded exactly the same as the one he was modeling.

At the end of the day, I'm just looking for "why?"  This isn't magical fairy dust. It all is based on knowledge of electrical engineering, the technology available (when the bean counters allow it), design philosophy, and psychoacoustics. 

Happy listening! 

@grunge1000 we all bemoan the lack of very many younger people getting into this hobby beyond their cellphones and earbuds or maybe Bluetooth noise cancelling headphones, so when a young 20-something coworker, who has backed into this hobby via home theater asks me questions contemplating a purchase, if I can't give him a valid "why" something should sound better, they might just decide to stick with Bluetooth, and that is rather sad. We need to grow this hobby, or we are going to end up with no middle ground choices. It will all be cheap Chi-Fi or $$$ boutique devices. Pity.  But yes, "just enjoy the music".