Discerning a difference between streamers is difficult...only me or common for all?

I use a separate server and streamer, and I noticed quite an improvement when I added the Sonore Signature Rendu SE Deluxe (optical) to perform streamer-only duties (Roon endpoint) in my system. On the server side (used to store digital music files and handle Roon core), I could hear no meaningful difference between servers from Antipodes, Mojo Audio, and my current sonicTransporter i9 (Gen 4). That may be different for listeners who challenge their servers with higher level DSD material.

I never thought about the music format/quality

100% of my streaming is done from Qobuz

No, you’re not insane. Differences with digital equipment can be quite subtle. I find the recording used to hear differences can be important. A good solo piano recording often helps to reveal differences. And with a streamer, it may not be in the obvious parameters like tone or bass quantity, but in less obvious things like image solidity, stability, or noise floor. Sometimes these things can be heard in the space in between notes. If you have really busy music, they may not be apparent. If your room is not treated, they may not be apparent. Etc., etc…. For my needs, I decided a long time ago to look at features needed (e.g., inputs, outputs, storage, Roon ready, etc.) in these devices over alleged sonic advantages.

Right now I happen to have a $400 streamer I bought for other purposes.  Using its SPDIF output with a $10 cable into my DAC sounds about the same as the main streamer, which is optically isolated, uses much more expensive cables, an outboard power supply, and isolation devices.  There is a difference but it is very subtle.  

Speaking in generalities, the differences between most audiophile components are subtle.  Listeners can a make a big deal about those differences, but they are still subtle.  Good sound doesn't have to be very expensive.  Great sound is a different story.

@dhite71

I can relate to your experience with ARC components. Your observations aligns with the design philosophy of brands like Audio Research (ARC) and McIntosh. Both have a “house sound” that tends to smooth over external influences, ensuring system synergy and a cohesive listening experience.

The ARC DAC9, for instance is praised for its refined, slightly warm, and musical sound, but it doesn’t let the personality of upstream components—like streamers—dominate the overall presentation. This can indeed feel like a blessing if you’re aiming for consistency, as it prevents potential mismatches or overly analytical sources from disrupting ARC’s characteristic musicality. On the flip side, it might feel limiting or frustrating at times if you’re trying to extract the unique tonal nuances of a particularly expressive streamer.

Similarly, McIntosh gear is known for its “house sound,” which is often described as lush, smooth, and forgiving. This sonic signature can veil or homogenize certain upstream subtleties, but it contributes to the brand’s famous ease of listening and fatigue-free performance.

In both cases, it’s a testament to these brands’ commitment to their sonic identity, ensuring that the listener always gets an experience that aligns with their philosophy, regardless of what sits in the signal chain before them.

Would you say this neutrality has been a benefit in your system, or do you miss the opportunity to experiment with a more “colorful” front end?

I experimented with both brands for extended period of time and gave them up for the reasons outlined above :-)