Is computer audio a bust?

"Not going to spend anything until I feel comfortable I know just what I'm getting into.

Always a good idea. :^)

I've had consistently good results using spdif for several years now and with various devices.

Not much with USB to-date but I do expect to investigate this more thoroughly very soon.

A network connection from computer server to sound making device/streamer is usually a good idea to help isolate sound making components from noisy computers.

Those are the main caveats I know of to get good results using good quality gear. Keeping noise and jitter to a minimum and using a good sounding DAC are keys in all cases regardless of the actual source device used.

Definitely NOT a bust if done right. Need not cost a fortune to do it well either.

The only down side with computer audio is the large data volumes with lossless audio files and the time that can be involved maintaining a library with good tagging, etc.

Be sure to have automated backup of files in place and to get tags as best possible when ripping CDs initially. Classical music files in particular can be a challenge to auto tag easily.

There is trial and error involved with learning how to tag properly using any particular software for that so be prepared to start over again with fresh copies of files when needed until you get the hang.

Getting excellent sound quality from computer audio is the relatively easy part, which should be good news for audiophiles.

COmputer literacy is needed for this as with many things these days. WIthout that there are a lot of dead ends possible.

Recently, I have added PLEX music server to enable high quality streaming of my files via internet for remote listening. THat alone opens up many possibilities for audiophile music lovers on the go in particular.

That's good stuff from AE.

I saw but did not get to listen to a new SOny HAP integrated music streaming device at a local dealer recently.

One of the nicer looking and seemingly simple and affordable digital home audio gadgets I have seen recently.

ANyone who has an Amazon Fire TV device already, or thinking of getting one, I am getting very good results from that running Plex ($5 app for Fire TV) to stream same .FLAC files as my current Squeezebox system that I have run happily for several years now.

Amazon Fire TV ($99) is a fairly decent powered, Android computer specialized for streaming high res audio and video. It has toslink out that can run into most any DAC. PLEX connects to PLEX server you run on your computer file server.

An added benefit of PLEX is that you can access your media (video, photos, music) from anywhere with an internet connection. I use an Ipod with good quality earbuds at the local pool for example and sound quality is top notch.

Its all very good stuff. Not a bust by any stretch.

PLEX is really very simple, at least the basic server and GUI apps are. Its still evolving very actively though, so I expect even better things soon down the road.

It can get a little tricky when you add in things like Casting, but that is a very nice capability once you get you arms around it.

Agree with Electroslacker.

The principles are not hard, but the products and technical choices are many and not always easy to sort through.

Computer audio is hardest for audiophiles who will sweat every detail in order to get the "best sound".

I am an old time music and audio lover plus I make my professional living getting computers to do what is needed. So computer audio comes as a natural thing to me.

Like most things computer, it will only continue to grow. Not the only kid on the block today, but I would love to take up a bet with anyone who thinks the future of computer audio is anything but grand.

Nice post by JC.

I really think traditional audiophiles have more issues with computer audio than most in that it requires a fresh mindset and a lot of openness to try new things.

True there are a lot of options, many incompatible with each other and that can be daunting.

After all, all phonos, amps, speakers, even CD players all pretty much work the same way, though not all devices are equally "compatible" with each other still.

GEtting things that are compatible with each other to work together well has always been what its about.

THe thing is that standards for computer audio are not fully mature yet, so that does make the task somewhat more daunting perhaps, expecially for the less computer savvy.

Easy goal is to get similar or better sound through the same DAC and system with computer source versus CD/transport.

Of course, if the CD players internal DAC is used, and there is no digital input, then it is not possible to get an apples and apples comparison.

I've found this to always be the case when I use spdif connection for both. Can be coax or optical, any decent good quality cable will do.

Not sure many if any CD players support USB, so apples and apples comparison there to computer USB is not easy to do.

Assuming good quality source gear and wires are used, the DAC used will make most of the difference in teh sound going into the same system.

I do wonder if anyone considering computer audio "a bust" have ever done such an apples and apples comparison into same DAC of course feeding the same system?

That's a valid apples/apples test. Otherwise, it is not apples/apples and highly DAC dependent and all bets should be off.

If one has a CD player and is satisfied listening to whole CDs, then probably no reason to change.

Computer audio opens up entirely new listening scenarios though beyond listening to one CD at a time. I can queue music in my library up in any order I want and let it play on. OR I can quickly search and find what I want to hear without interruption. I find I have discovered a ton of new music I was not familiar with but learned to like this way compared to the old way of picking one CD or recording to listen to at a time. Very liberating and very conducive for exploring new music. Plus the album, track artist and related info is at your fingertips to explore further if desired.

Then there is the variety of music available via internet radio and music streaming services, many with very good sound quality these days as well.

These are features that add utility to the music listening experience for most. No need to change really unless one is interested in exploring the new possibilities with computer audio. Sound quality can be top notch either way with just a little care and attention.

"I see many posts as to the ease of using computer audio. But nothing about how long it took to set up your music library and the cost and time involved. Anybody? Were you able to get that great sound you have right out of the gate, or did you have to keep changing things as the technology improved? Just curious."

YEs, I got great sound right out of the gate several years ago using a Roku Squeezebox and DAC of choice. That continued as I moved to Squeezebox feeding same DAC and system, and now as well as I start to implement PLEX as an eventual Squeezebox replacement.

Cost is minimal compared to a lot of "high end" audio, especially if you already have a computer.
Creating and maintaining a library does involve some work to get tagging correct, but mostly for classical music. Setting up backups with software is not hard or costly. Seagate drives work great and come with backup software already installed for example.

Data volumes for lossless music libraries can get large. My .wav library of about 2000 CDs comes in at just under 1Tb and the converted FLAC version about half that.

Slacker,

Have you ever compared JRiver to MEdiaMonkey?

I've used MM recently to convert my .wav files to flac for use with Logitech and PLEX. Also for auto and manual tagging of flac files, along with Picard.

I have been able to get free MM to do things as it should, but am not thrilled with it overall. I've ripped a couple test disks to FLAC with it and find the tagging quirky and the rip quality somewhat of an unknown. MM requires a paid version for more assured accurate rips apparently, and not quite ready to go there based on experiences with MM to date.

How is Jriver in these areas? Is it apples/apples to compare the two?

Abuck,

In my case I had hundreds of CDs before going to digital music server.

A lot of those CDs stayed on the shelf and were seldom played in lieu of my more favorite ones. Exploring my CD music library extensively just did not happen nearly as much.

Now, as a result of listening to tracks from CDs on my server served up to me randomly by my digital player like a jukebox, rather than me having to seek out and play some track I am not really all that familiar with to start, I would say I get more than 1000% more enjoyment out of my existing music collection, without having to add a thing or listen to other sources. That all happens much more as well as my musical tastes become more diverse. And it all sounds as good as or better than ever as well.

All thanks to computer audio.

Now I spend my time finding really useful new things that I might try or do with different devices, software, features etc.

Much more productive than typical audiophile crap at this somewhat evolved point for me, like comparing sound with different fuses. I still do a lot of fine tuning of the gear I have, like moving speakers around and swapping into various rooms, to get the good sound results I always demand.

"An interesting thread. I didn't realize that there were a large number of people who had sampled C.A., found it wanting, and went back to CDPs. If one reads audiophile mags, particularly the British ones, you would never get that impression. "

I doubt there are a large # of people doing this frankly.

The title of this thread kind of skews the debate in that direction I think.

I suspect going around in general proposing that computer audio is a bust would be a losing proposition except with a) those already content with what they are doing so they have no need or 2) those who don't know what computer audio is and/or do not really care.

Lab,

The error in your logic is that there is no sound made with the data transfer function of any computer system. Data is just moved from one place to another over a network connection. Algorithms implemented in teh computer software GUARANTEE that all data is wither moved accurately and completely or not at all. COmputers could not ever work otherwise.

Turning computer data into sound is where traditional audiophile concerns come into play. WIth a network music streamer that process starts at the streamer and flows to the DAC. NEtwork connection to get the data to the streamer prior only matters to be fast enough to get the data there ahead of time before converted to sound. DElays in playing may occur when data is rebuffered in order to be ready for conversion, but sound quality will not suffer. That is how network streamers are designed to work.

dDigital conenctions from computer to DAC are a totally different story. The computer and USB bus is now a key part of the real time music making process. Results may vary greatly depending on how well everything works together as a music making system. Computers are not generally designed to necessarily always preserve highest possible sound quality, so a lot of variability in results can occur with this kind of "architecture" for computer audio.

Rule is to always use a device made to produce good quality sound as the feed to a DAC. Network music or even general hi res media streamers (Like PLEX) are designed for this. Most computers are not. Not to say a computer to dac connection cannot work well, but the devil is all in the very technical details. Network music/media streamers are designed for music/media and are always the safe bet to get the sound most audiophiles seek.

MEdia streamers like PLEX support very fast streaming rates, beyond those typically used for any digital audio today alone, so these devices and the software itself is a good place to look for teh ability to do not just hi res audio but HD video streaming as well, which is a much bigger task.

PLEX media server and player appliations is a very good place for anyone to start with that is looking for good sounding computer audio without a major investment in a lot of proprietary hardware, like SOnos, BlueSound, or Squeezebox in the past.

Plus, PLEX is a high res MEDIA server, not just audio, so HD video, digital photography and hi res music streaming are all part of PLEX.

If anyone is interested, I am open to emails on teh topic. I have just started with PLEX recently as an experiment to replace Squeezebox eventually and have had a lot of success to date I can share, plus I am very interested in what other audiophiles might be doing with PLEX or anything else out there similar.

Plex server runs on Windows for sure. Maybe other OSs. Check the download site to see. SOme NAS might work.

Plex client apps run on Android, and IOS. Also a web app via web browser.

Requires further investigation to know what NAS devices might be supported so far.

For greater than CD resolution, computer audio may be the only viable ticket in town at this point with any stable future ahead of it.

Personally, I have not gone there to-date in that I am happy with CD resolution in most cases and the benefits I foresee do not outweigh the overhead and cost involved, though Plex might help put me there sooner rather than later. It supports very high streaming rates for HD video. NOt exactly sure yet how much of that carries over into audio libraries, but when I stream audio at the higher bitrates available, some CD level or higher, it sounds VERY GOOD!!!!

I'll be steering clear of proprietary hardware and software as much as possible moving forward, especially any computer hardware from one off companies.

This stuff is still changing to rapidly. I think Android makes a versatile platform for companies to build high quality digital A/V applications on.

A standardized digital output that can feed a high quality DAC of ones choice is all that is really needed.

No two anything perform exactly the same, but to date difference from one SPDIF digital cable to another is not significant to me. Differences with many analog wires I try are. Many other things that have much more significant effects on the sound, in practice as well as in theory it seems, and are much better places for one to invest their time getting the sound just right.

Not to say all digital wires always sound the same....just that I do not hear enough difference to date in general to be concerned about it when things are already sounding excellent on the grand scale of things. My mistake maybe, but one I can live with easily.

USB digital connections is the one type I suspect will tend towards more noticeable variation in sound quality case by case depending on implementation, which is why I am happy I have mostly been able to avoid having to deal much with those to-date. USB, unlike SPDIF is not designed solely for audio, so many outcomes are possible.

WHen the time comes, I will shoot for an asynchronous USB implementation where DAC-side clock rather than general purpose computer manages timing and required bandwidth reliably and use a USB wire of good quality from a reputable maker like I do with most things and expect that to do the job quite well.

"Computer audio via USB is an absolute BUST! USB is for connecting peripherials - not for music!"

IT can work well for music but not designed only for that.

The USB based setup has to be designed to work properly for high quality sound. Not all are, which makes it trickier to get right than SPDIF, which was designed for A/V use.

So it may be a bust in some cases, but not if done right.

Good news its probably much easier and affordable to get really good sound with computer audio than with lp vinyl.

I'd be willing to bet the % of good quality home computer setups out there today is way higher than the corresponding % of vinyl rigs ever out there at any time. That's good news for most people, but if your vinyl setup is high quality, then you have a higher reference quality to meet or better and some effort of a different type will be required to do it.

OR just take the easy way out and blame the product or format or technology in general. Much easier that way....

Time will tell.....

Agear,

As I understand it, USB asynch mode is one of several mmodes of operation for USB. It is intended to assure bandwidth,which is needed for high res audio to stream fast enough to keep up with playback. It also allows the "peripheral"device to be in control. You want that to be a DAC of high quality which includes an accurate clock to keep jitter minimal. In lieu of that, computer/server assumes that responsibility and other modes not as well suited for audio sound quality may come into play.

CErrot,

Bandwidth + good design is the key. The data must be available at the time needed. Then as in all cases, the d2a conversion process must be done well. All within the capabilities of the technology, but only if done right.

Same with any source. How many cheap crappy ceramic cart turntables are out there compared to the good stuff? Same story.

If one simply buys a recent design good quality USB DAC designed for optimal performance, like BEnchmark for example, (need not cost much), you should be in very good shape.

Much easier than getting a good turntable and then having to match everything and set it up properly. Its a relative piece of cake.

Bc,

I hear you.

I am a glutton for punishment sometimes I suppose, but I do like to refute inaccurate or questionable things that get published when I feel I am knowledgeable enough or qualified to do so. Jut to help keep things straight. Its a dirty job, but one that every knowledgeable music and audio lover should partake in.

Just be sure to keep a sense of humor around as well.....

I would always tend to steer away from converters. One more hard to quantify variable to throw in the mix. Keep it simple. USe good quality devices and wires intended to work together out of the gate. Things can never be better using a converter/adapter, only worse.

Abuck,

Plex on amazon fire tv box with toslink out to dac, $99.

You need a hdmi tv for display.

Also you can cast from mobile devices and control from there.

Plex server software is free download and mobile app is $5

"what takes computer audio over the top as a source"

Now that's a more reasonable qustion for sure.

As a source to an existing home stereo system:

CD res or higher lossless files -> Music server->network connection-> network player->good DAC of your choice.

As a source for headphone listening where demand for amplification is much less, player software designed for good sound (I use PLEX) on a computer with just a decent built in DAC to just any decent pair of headphones. Even listening at work via internet connection to my music server at home, using headphone analog out, the sound is over the top in that I enjoy listening for extended periods.

My turntable started to be mostly relegated to the sidelines when I started using old Roku Soundbridge to my current DACs a few years back prior to moving to Squeezebox. Now with nothing new happening with Squeezebox, I am forging ahead for now with PLEX.

I still have two Roku Soundbridge devices around in original packaging that I do not use anymore. Sound quality of those even was top notch into my preferred DACs, very much like Squeezebox. ANyone interested in testing the waters on the cheap with those let me know. They and one of my two Squeezebox Touch devices are sitting unused today. They connect to built in Windows MEdia player on Windows (that is what I used them with mostly) and most other standards compliant music servers for .wav files.

Tortilla is right about the value of using a network to get the data to the player. I agree 100%. It makes what you use as the computer essentially irrelevant in regards to sound quality. As long as there is enough storage and processing power streaming is a trivial task for most any computer made in the last 10 years. I have tried many configurations this way and the sound quality does not vary into same DAC. Whereas sound quality with computer based play software is all over the place. USB implementation is a significant factor as well, but software used to play seems to be the biggest variable I hear to-date.

If you have any PC with a decent quality optical drive, Windows Media Player can be configured to rip to lossless .wav file format very easily. THis works very well, just make sure WMP displays the tags correctly before starting the rip because editing .wav file tags after the fact is not easy.

Once ripped, you can use the free version of MEdia Monkey to convert to otehr formats as needed. FLAC is best overall for sound quality and tagging.

Or a small investment in dbpoweramp will give you most everything you need to rip and tag fairly easily as well. Add MusicBRainz Picard to help with autotagging where possible and you are quite armed and dangerous for very little investment, although all tools will have a modest learning curve up front to figure out how to use them best in each case.

AUdiolab,

Might the dealers viewpoint be skewed by the fact that these traditional "audio" only devices is their bread and butter whereas one can build a very good computer audio system with a little know-how without ever having to visit those traditional shops?

Most larger local B&M shops in my area that are still around have major inventory and floorspace dedicated to computer audio related gizmos. As always, they sell the gear that is of better quality and easier to integrate perhaps than what one might put together themselves otherwise.

Myself, I make a living from understanding and applying computer technology, so I have not bought anything for that from an audio store to-date becasue frankly I will pay a premium there for nothing better than what I might assemble myself otherwise, but, as has always been the case, there is value in going to someone with that special expertise needed to deliver good sound still for many, though there are many other options out there these days than ever before. Overall, its a win win for everyone.

I suspect its much harder (and likely more expensive as well) to get optimal performance out of a turntable system than it is out of computer audio these days for most. ALso one will likely listen differently and in a less constrained manner with computer audio not bound by content or song order of individual releases, location, etc. You get a lot more versatility with computer audio and sound quality these days when done right (does not cost much) is top notch.

The two advantages of records I see are that good sounding used ones can be had for next to nothing and the large physical format and packaging of 33 1/3 lps as a product you can hold in your hands and enjoy may never be matched again. Also some (like me) might just think that turntables are cool and maybe even fun.

I use Squeezebox Touch for example and started out with .wav for several years and recently converted to FLAC. I do not hear much difference there. I'm pretty sure SB system converts .way source files to lossless compressed .flac anyhow for greater bandwidth under the covers, so it does quite well with those. I am also hearing good results so far with FLAC and newer Plex system I have started to implement alongside aging Squeezebox.

Computer audio works with .wav but flac and other formats designed for dynamic tagging make things more fun and cut storage and network bandwidth requirements roughly in half, adding a lot of flexibility there as well. I do not anticipate ever going back to .wav, rather sticking with gear that works well with FLAC, like PLEX.

If I am not mistaken, by default, Squeeze system converts WAV to flac when it goes over the wire.

There is no difference in information content between lossless compressed flac and uncompressed. If it sounds different there is some other reason for that. I moved from uncompressed lossless wav to compressed lossless flac with no problem.

Tbg,

agree the processing is different and may or may not be done well. Should not be a problem if done properly. Any modern computer with good software should be up to the task but that does not guarantee it is done correctly with best possible sound in mind.

FWIW software processing of uncompressed files can vary and be done well or not also so format alone assures nothing.

The same way you know what other audio components might sound good, by doing homework, auditioning and comparing the options.

I play FLAc files via 2 different Squeezebox touch units that I played .WAV prior. I also play them via PLEX application on Amazon fire box using toslink out to DAC. I am very happy with the results with both.

Plex has made a lot of progress in the last year.   I plan to do a comprehensive review soon.   Plex is a no brainer for Audiophiles looking to cautiously get into digital streaming for both audio and AV.    Sound quality is top notch,  runs on most any common computer phone tablet and other streaming devices, nice GUI,  very full featured and one can start for free or next to nothing.  I still have my Squeeze devices but Plex is slowly taking over in my house. 

I've started running plex app player on my laptop with usb connection to mhdt dac in my main setup.    Results are really impressive and exceeded my expectations for an older usb dac.  I've been running squeezebox touch to same dac and system for many years.  You really  never know for sure with this stuff until you try.