Point of higher priced streamer?

@ironlung — excellent explanation about wired vs WiFi. This should be standard textbook reply to the ‘zeroes are zeroes and ones are ones’ crowd. 

@ironlung Great info on ROON. I did not realize that RAAT was UDP. Anyways, I do have my ROON Core setup wired as you described.

Now that I am using ROONS's Convolution engine the usefulness of ROON is through the roof for me. ROON really delivered on what they promised 5 years ago. I bought a lifetime license for $450 back then.

I believe “the” Audio2Design (previously posting under AtDavid , Dannad, and several other fake usernames) has met his match in Audiogon forums 🤭

IronLung: I understand your post on Shunyata, and I accept it. Please note that Shunyata never had any $6,000 power cords before, until a few months ago, when Omega was launched (and why not). Venom is “entry-level” alright, with “NR” being really envelope pushing IMO, but above it, there are several affordable tiers, such as Delta, Alpha, Sigma. Way before you get to your $6,000 stuff Omega.

I totally agree with you that people should take a listen to a few different brands first before making a conclusion for their application.

This is audio not rocket science. Even 24/192 is minimal data and and any number of bit perfect options exist. Wireless networks are more than sufficient to carry audio error free with retry. Again not rocket science. Data rates are way faster than needed to recover lost packets without breaks.


Your posts are conjecture, no more.

Respectfully, it seems to me that your post is coming from an arena of conjecture and lack of comprehension.

The question I was replying to was with specific regard to Roon. Roon uses an architecture that relies heavily on a robust network and anyone investing $500 in Roon software to manage their music library should consider the small investment to get the necessary infrastructure to hardwire their endpoint and Roon Core to the same network switch.

While from a pure data perspective you are not wrong, you are ignoring a bunch of factors, including the delivery protocols which are used to stream audio on the network in the first place, not to mention the inherent challenges of WiFi.

If a server (Roon Core in this case) is delivering real-time audio data over the network, it is using some method of UDP encapsulation (which they term RAAT) to send the audio to the endpoint. UDP can and does experience dropouts if sufficient attention is not paid to how the network is configured as well as what other devices may also be using the same datagram protocols on the network.

The above paragraph applies to a wired network. Wireless adds the complexity of an air-based physical medium (instead of a copper or fiber connector between the networked devices) which is prone to interference, signal loss, noise, improperly set timing thresholds, improperly configured channel bands, additional latency problems, etc.

Further, depending on the chipset in the device(s), WiFi can be limited to half-duplex transmission, meaning it can require twice as much network and processing resources to perform checksums of the packet data. This is less of an issue with 5GHz A/C bands and MIMO capable WiFi access points these days, but unless you are aware of what chipset your audio/streamer manufacturer is using for their WiFi implementation, it's certainly possible to still run into this limitation.

For someone with a single Roon (or other network endpoint) with an off-the shelf Asus/Netgear/TP Link router, WiFi should be fine for the endpoint, but the Core should still be hardwired.

Things get complicated really quick as soon as you add more wireless devices to the network, especially if they are competing for the same resources on the network.

Also, WiFi chipsets inside network streamers can add unwanted noise, depending on who designed the thing.

I had to laugh at your comment because I've fixed so many problems for people by switching them from a consumer-based WiFi connection for their audio streamer/endpoint to a hardwired connection because they were experiencing dropouts, and had many satisfied listeners. It's simply less hassle if you can hardwire when you can.

WiFi should be used for tablets, laptops, phones, etc. Permanently located, non-mobile devices with an ethernet connection should be hardwired whenever possible. It's best practice type stuff.

On Shunyata, you make it sound like they only make $6,000 power cords. Which is far from reality. In fact, their current lineup, Venom NR v12 is an excellent power cord, at only $398. Obviously less, if you know the right people. Give it try, you will see (hear) for yourself.

I am fully aware that they make "entry-level" products. I don't have any issue with their products and think they are quite good. All of the other brands I mentioned also make lower priced products in the same category. My intent was to suggest that folks who do want to spend $6k on a power cord should take a listen to a few different brands first before making a conclusion for their application.

Iron lung,

This is audio not rocket science. Even 24/192 is minimal data and and any number of bit perfect options exist. Wireless networks are more than sufficient to carry audio error free with retry. Again not rocket science. Data rates are way faster than needed to recover lost packets without breaks.


Your posts are conjecture, no more.

Hi @ironlun, thanks for chiming in around here. 
On Shunyata, you make it sound like they only make $6,000 power cords. Which is far from reality. In fact, their current lineup, Venom NR v12 is an excellent power cord, at only $398. Obviously less, if you know the right people. Give it try, you will see (hear) for yourself.

I am not sure if WiFi is also a contender for this. Other that Aurelic no one else is pushing Wifi.

WiFi should only be used when absolutely necessary. I know there are Auralic guys who claim the WiFi input on their streamers is the better connection to make to the network, but I think if that's the case then the ethernet implementation must be poor.

WiFi is totally fine to use for the control point but in terms of connection between the server (Roon Core) and the client (Roon RAAT/Ready device) the connection should be hardwired with sufficient detail paid to the rest of the network to minimize possible conflicts/bottlenecks.

There may be people with minimal networks and a robust enough WiFi connection that Roon will work over a wireless connection to an endpoint, but my guess is most people using Roon are hardwired ethernet. 

@ironlung I get what you are saying and the is also what i was thinking was going on under the hood. That 10db difference is another matter but not really a concern. BTW - I was streaming to the Rendu via ROON RAAT.

I am now seeing a Network DAC input as the short term future for me. My current DAC can use the Ethernet, my next DAC needs the Ethernet for the best sound (the AudioByte HUB component). Unless I get the Benchmark DAC3B again the microRendu is going to sit idle.

My hope for the longer term is that DACs get a Fibre optical input like the $15K Lumin X1. That way a direct fibre wire from an Network switch to a ROON READY DAC.

I am not sure if WiFi is also a contender for this. Other that Aurelic no one else is pushing Wifi. I have rock solid Wifi but have not really tested it out. The Matrix does support Wifi but I need ROON READY certification for that to work. So  I will try this one day soon.

I was not expecting the AirPlay2 to sound so close sonically to the microRendu.

@yyzsantabarbara 

If you are using USB from a microRendu into a USB DAC, the DAC is treating the data differently than through a network connection.

The technical reasons for this will make most people's eyes bleed but in a nutshell the protocol(s) being used to deliver the stream data are quite a bit different under the hood.

AirPlay2 and Roon endpoints are essentially "capturing" real-time playback occurring on an auxiliary device over the network. 

In this scenario what you are comparing is the Matrix DAC's ability to "capture" an AirPlay2 stream from the network and deliver it directly to the DAC circuit, to the Sonore's ability to "capture" the same stream (assuming from AirPlay2, or Roon, it wasn't exactly clear) from the network and convert it to a USB digital stream for use by the USB input on the DAC.

Looking at it in this light you can see there is an additional process in the signal path using the Sonore microRendu which is unnecessary if Matrix audio have done their job correctly on the network side. It's likely why you are surprised at the similar fidelity.

@vinylshadow

But there aren’t many "inexpensive" options where I can use my phone as the controller.

Actually, there are quite a few. If you do a little research you'll find there are a lot of apps for Android or iPhone which offer the ability to use a phone or tablet to act as a control point for software residing on a Windows PC, Mac, or Linux machine. For example, there are a number of different UPnP servers/media software (many are free and/or cheap) which you can access with programs like Bubble DS, Plug Player (not sure if that is still around), etc. to control a simple web-browser based media player.

Heck, I used to run an old Windows PC with Foobar 2000 and an iPhone App called MonkeyMote: https://www.monkeymote.com/home

They have Android versions of the App and you can use a number of player software (JRiver, foobar, AIMP, Winamp). 

You don't need anything particularly powerful for this type of application, a pretty basic PC will work just fine and with the right player software will likely sound quite a bit better using your USB>SPDIF convertor.

I'd guess one could put something like this together for less than $200 if being savvy and patient to find the right stuff. 

To top it off you can then also install whatever streaming service's app you happen to like (or want to try) - like Spotify, Tidal, or Qobuz - and control the app on the PC from the service's phone app as well (most seem to be doing this nowadays).

To the thoughtful posts on power cables, it is incredible how expensive some of them are. I respect Shunyata but can a $6000 Omega mains sound $4000 better than a $2000 Vertere Acoustic HB mains?

When you put it in those terms, not really. But if $4,000 is a drop in the bucket for you, and you have the inclination to spend a lot of money on HiFi, I'm sure there are plenty of people who can convince others that the difference is worth the extra $4K

The issue I find with the expensive cables is that only some of them offer synergy and improvement with certain equipment while sometimes actually detracting from the performance of certain other gear. 

And to make things more complicated. if one is considering a $6,000 Shunyata mains lead, one is doing themselves a disservice by not evaluating Transparent, Nordost, AQ, Cardas, Kubala-Sosna, Chord, Furutech, MIT, or any other number of high quality brands I've failed to include on that list - and evaluating those next to their supplied leads or OEM offerings from quality suppliers like Volex.

My main DAC today is a Matrix Mini-i 3 Pro. I sold my Benchmark DAC3B today. I hope to buy a much more expensive DAC in the Spring. So tonight I thought I would do a few streaming tests.

The Matrix is rather incredible in terms of connectivity. However, at the moment the Matrix Mini DAC is not ROON READY via the Ethernet RJ45 streaming input (Matrix is working on it with ROON). You can setup Apple AirPlay2 on the ROON Server and also the DAC to play music from ROON via an iPhone. In this setup, the Airplay2 protocol uses the DAC’s Ethernet RJ45 input to stream data. I also have an Sonore microRendu that has been my only streamer for the last 5 years with various DACs. I love the microRendu connected to a DAC’s USB input.

So tonight I tested Muddy Waters - Hard Again album with both ROON zones, AirPlay2 and the microRendu. The AirPlay2 sounded a lot more lively so I was shocked by that. I thought there was something funny going on. I turned my iPhones SPL meter and found that the AirPlay2 was 10 db louder than the microRendu. Likely something in the iPhone settings.

I made an adjust on the SPL level when streaming via the microRendu. This is pretty easy with my Benchmark HPA4 which has an incredibly precise volume control. I then compared the Mannish Boy track again and I could not tell a difference. That was also very surprising. I was not expecting the AirPlay2 to sound so close sonically to the microRendu. My DAC is a brand new model released in 2020 and has some great tech in it (for $899). So maybe streaming has gotten much more reliable these days.

Once the DAC is made ROON READY I will create another ROON Server zone for the Ethernet RJ45 (might have to remove the AirPlay2 zone). I will compare that with the microRendu and if possible AirPlay2. I am rather shocked by what I heard today.

These are fine people on both sides 😂🤪

This is just recreational arguing at this point.  Both sides aren't without merit and nothing will get decided.  So what's the point?

This is a great thread. Thanks everyone for posting their opinions. I want to move up a level to something with a power supply as I’ve read that makes a big difference.

I’m using a Nobsound USB to SPDIF Converter XMOS XU20 with no power supply, connected to my Android and to my Classe processors DAC through a 75 ohm dig cable(I know it aint 75 ohm though). It sounds pretty good as my Classe’s DAC is 24/192 and it gets Bit Perfect through UAPP but I bet there is a step up with a power source. But there aren’t many "inexpensive" options where I can use my phone as the controller.

To the thoughtful posts on power cables, it is incredible how expensive some of them are. I respect Shunyata but can a $6000 Omega mains sound $4000 better than a $2000 Vertere Acoustic HB mains?

We're not comparing apples to apples we're trying decide can this person really tell one from the other then we can go on to figure out is it due to hardware? Software? 

Listening to local music files on a USB memory stick attached directly to the Pro-ject streamer sounds smoother, clearer and with better musical flow than the same track via Qobuz.

Because we have to first determine is this statement true? The only way I know of is can he pick which is which better than chance? 

There is no compression algorithm for ‘actual’ listening. 

Could be none of the above. Unless the two were compared with a controlled blind test it doesn't tell us anything. To me Quboz sounds better than a flash drive connected to the streamer, again unless I did this comparison blind it tells us nothing to further our knowledge.

Please explain exactly what you mean by "controlled blind test" and how one would be able to adequately make such a comparison using a file streamed from Qobuz, versus a file on a USB flash memory.

Unless you can prove the files are identical using a checksum hash such a comparison is actually impossible. I don't think you've thought this through much.

Professing substantial differences in SQ based on, wow I heard veils lifted,  only applies to one person who claims to have heard something without any meaningful attempt to control biases. Now pray tell what does that actually  contribute to understanding if one streamer performs better than another?  Why would I base a purchase decision on hyperbole and cost? Listening with your ears is necessary, listening with your eyes and preconceptions about if it costs more it must be better is unnecessary. 

Yeah... bottom feeders like our friend here, who has zero confidence on his ears, and gets a hard on every time he stares at a graph other people post online 🙄

@thyname — don’t you understand audio is not about music or ‘what you hear’. It’s all about measurements and double blind tests, paper tigers, and graph gremlins. The actual act of listening is not only unnecessary, it’s highly overrated. 

🙄🙄. And the I.D. 10T error strikes again. No one is allowed to post any impressions or explanation on anything, unless backed by “a controlled blind test”. Oh please, give it a break

Could be none of the above. Unless the two were compared with a controlled blind test it doesn't tell us anything. To me Quboz sounds better than a flash drive connected to the streamer, again unless I did this comparison blind it tells us nothing to further our knowledge. 

Listening to local music files on a USB memory stick attached directly to the Pro-ject streamer sounds smoother, clearer and with better musical flow than the same track via Qobuz.

If the files are actually the same, then this is likely due to the chipset implementation being used on the ethernet/LAN side, particularly in the final processing stages before the packets are delivered to the memory buffer.

However it's also possible that the provenance of the files on your USB flash media are closer to the original (or just better sounding) master. It may not have anything to do with the chipset implementation at all. 

This may have been mentioned; I didn't see it in this thread. Adding a streamer means that music is no longer coming from your iPad. You would sign into streaming services (Qobuz, Spotify, Tidal) on the streamer, music is sent directly to the streamer from the Internet, and an iPhone/iPad/Web browser on a computer is used only to control the streamer. The  iPhone/iPad/Web browser on a computer is not the source of your streamed music.

I recently got a Pro-ject Stream Box Ultra S2 at $850 instead of streaming from an iPhone or computer. I considered the Bluesound Node 2i, but read enough reviews and forum postings to think that the Pro-ject might sound better. So I took a shortcut by not directly comparing both streamers. Short answer from me about whether a streamer is worth it is that I was astounded at how good a cheap Dragonfly Red could sound with the Pro-ject streamer versus an iPhone or computer as the source. Same held true for a Denafrips Ares II DAC.

A thought that I had about not starting off with an expensive streamer is to figure out how well optimizing other parts of the signal path might compare to a more expensive streamer. I think these optimizations that I find could also improve a more expensive streamer so I don't think the cost of doing these experiments will be money wasted. If not, I haven't spent $thousands to do these experiments. My null hypothesis is that these optimizations will make no difference to the sound and my personal hope is that cheaper solutions are just as good as more expensive one (USB cables, Using Ethernet rather than WiFi, Ethernet switch to reclock the signal, etc.) The parts of my signal path that MIGHT make a difference and which I will experiment on are:

1. USB Cable to DAC:
- Result of this experiment: Generic HP printer USB-A to USB-B cable sounds like crap (Sound feels shut-in and veiled. Trailing edge of notes have an overhang. Treble is a bit harsh, Bass sounds tubby), Belkin Gold USB cable ($12) sounded okay, Pangea USB cable ($50) had better resolution but was a bit harsh. Shunyata Venom cable ($100-200) was better overall and unfortunately a $250 Phasure Lush cable sounded best of all (most detailed and articulate, but also very pleasant in tone quality). I'm sold on the effect of spending a bit more on a USB cable.
2. USB Noise filter (Added an Audioquest Jitterbug noise filter on the USB output): I found out about this inadvertently. I had a Jitterbug on hand and thought 'what the h@ll', just plug it in and see what happens. What a surprise. Same DACs (Dragonfly Red & Denafrips Ares II both sounded more 3-dimensional with better resolution, more evident tonal colors , more reverb & presence around voices and instruments. A significant improvement from a $60 device.
3. Use Ethernet cable instead of WiFi, turn off WiFi on streamer (I needed to get a network extender to create an Ethernet access point & also get an Ethernet cable to do this) - Results TBD, total cost of TP-Link network extender and generic Amazon Cat 6 Ethernet cable was about $45
4. Switching from a generic Ethernet cable to a better Cat 8 Ethernet cable -  Results TBD, cost was a Supra Cat 8 cable that I got for $60
5. Better power supply: Apparently the Pro-ject is reported to have better clean power so I'm choosing not to bother with this step. That was one of the advantages that I saw in getting the Pro-ject.
6. Ethernet switch:  Using an Ethernet switch to reclock the Ethernet signal (i.e. Uptone Audio EtherRegen): A friend has one that I might borrow

How I'm testing: Do I hear a difference initially? How do I feel about the change when listening casually over a period of time? Does my 15 y.o. son hear a benefit? (He doesn't care so much about audio but seems to have good hearing). I figure things that make a difference only when listening casually and also don't engage my interest when listening over time aren't worth the money.

Oh, one thing that I've heard that tells me there are improvements to be had with my current streaming setup. Listening to local music files on a USB memory stick attached directly to the Pro-ject streamer sounds smoother, clearer and with better musical flow than the same track via Qobuz. I figure that the shorter signal path might have less opportunity to be affected by outside noise.

@arafiq Apologies accepted. In my experience, there aren't too many folks posting around on forums capable of answering the kind of questions OP posted, so I would hope my content differs wildly from the opinions of others who have tried and failed.

@ironlung -- in that case, please accept my apologies.

@ironlung I for one am enjoying your posts and learning quite a bit. Thank you.

Great to hear. There's just so much confusion about all of this stuff I finally decided to try to do my part to elucidate some of the nuances involved.

@ironlung  I for one am enjoying your posts and learning quite a bit.  Thank you.

^^ Are we seeing yet another reincarnation of the famous poster who keeps popping up like hydra's heads?
 

The 14 posts I've written thus far are the only posts I have ever submitted to Audiogon forums, period. 

^^ Are we seeing yet another reincarnation of the famous poster who keeps popping up like hydra's heads?

you must run usb to get the Best out of a dac only usb ofers asyncronous data transfer which cits down on zransmittteed jitter

Actually this is not entirely true. While most do, some DACs do not use Asynchronous USB, but isosynchronous; also not all DACs sound better from a USB connection depending on how the grounding and power rails for the USB interface have been implemented with the rest of the DAC board, not to mention variations in the source of the USB stream.

There are plenty of DACs with SPDIF/BNC/AES inputs, which when matched with a properly clocked (low-jitter) SPDIF output, will perform better with the same files compared to a USB delivery. It really depends on the DAC and application.

@paulcreed not sure what you mean with 'noisy', but, ime, some systems pick up noise originating from the MacBook wall wart power supply. Good conditioners (Furman, Shunyata in my case) reject this noise entirely. You can also run the MacBook for many hours of battery power alone (no audible difference in my case, but if that wall wart causes trouble ...) Of course you don't want any other applications like messaging, email etc. run on that macbook.
Re soundstage: Roon seems to provide for perfect time domain control of the digital data stream, and, again, ime, imaging is superb. Somebody else here stated that they prefer wired ethernet connection over Wi-Fi. Again, I believe this depends on the quality of your home Wi-Fi system. Multi-channel mesh systems have very high capacity, no drop outs, etc. and, again, in my experience, streaming from a MacBook via Roon to an OPPO 205, with the MacBook receiving signal via WiFi and sending signal to the OPPO via WiFi, sounds superior to any variation of one or both digital connections by ethernet cable. In the end, Ethernet cables are not that well shielded and you would expect some RFI/EMI contamination of the unit they are connected too, but that is speculation on my side. WiFi of course provides for complete electrical isolation.

Larry this begs to know did u run the external dac from the node?

As discussed previously the node is a very poor digital transport compred to a dedicated high server lika an lumin innous 432 evo and you must run usb to get the Best out of a dac only usb ofers asyncronous data transfer which cits down on zransmittteed jitter

We are specialsts in this area we have sold and tested most brands of streamers

Dave and troy
Audio intellect nj

Maybe I missed it, but one thing missing in a lot of streaming/ external DAC discussions is buffers.  The data signal processing is not like a telegraph that goes straight from signal to output.  The data is assembled in buffers, whether in a PC, Mac, Streamer, or DAC, and then fed to either the next buffer or the final internal processing within the unit. So the transfer is much closer to transferring a Word file, which USB can do all day without errors. This is not to say there aren't difference, but it makes the issue more puzzling. I just think we err in thinking of the data transfer as a finely tuned triple-play in baseball where timing is everything, and a pause is fatal.

Perhaps the issue is the resulting blackness of the background from which the music emerges.  We can think we know black until we encounter blacker, so perhaps the noise is not distortion of signal but a graying of the background.

Just wild speculation.

It’s called expectation bias.   I saw a good friend show himself up in front of a room full of guys comparing his £6000 mains cable Vs a £3.50 kettle lead.
The lad doing the switching had double bluffed.   My mate was claiming “night & day, you’re all deaf”.    Embarrassing

I've experienced utter dismay on the part of cable salesmen when I've proven to them their product doesn't deliver. I've also been pleasantly surprised by actual improvements with very expensive, high end cables, but those experiences are rare and only happen when the entire system is thought out. I've also experienced expensive cables work well with certain components while sounding like total trash with others. Some products simply sound better with the manufacturer supplied leads - they engineered it that way after all. 

It's possible your friend has heard such an improvement with this particular cable in his own system that he never bothered to consider it may not always provide such an improvement when used in a different scenario - and I wouldn't be surprised if it could very well sound/perform worse.
 
Too many of the high end power cables have issues connecting to mains supplies properly (I'm speaking of a proper grip with the connectors on the outlet itself) that it's pointless to upgrade the cable if you don't also upgrade the mains outlet to a receptacle that can support the type of "hospital grade" connectors many of those cables feature. 

At the end of the day the guys who typically spend a lot on cables have either already maxed their respective budget with the rest of their system components and are having a bit of fun, are trying to compensate for a flaw present within the system because it wasn't set up properly to begin with, or have had an experience with someone who can properly demonstrate, implement, and prescribe the correct cable pairing for the application. The last is quite possibly a unicorn in this hobby!

Quote larry5729
Bet if you did a blind test, most people would buy the BlueSound Node2i. I added a DAC and had to sell it on Audiogon. The BlueSound sounded better on its own. I call it the Emperor's New Cloths syndrome. If you spend more, you convince yourself it sounds better. However, I am sure streamers costing $3000 to $5000 must sound better. How much better is the real question? Do they sound $2,500 to $4,500 better?  

—————

It’s called expectation bias.   I saw a good friend show himself up in front of a room full of guys comparing his £6000 mains cable Vs a £3.50 kettle lead.
The lad doing the switching had double bluffed.   My mate was claiming “night & day, you’re all deaf”.    Embarrassing.

Thing is, he’s never learned from that experience.   He’s too emotionally invested.   He believes reviews or anything a dealer tells him, but is oblivious to that real life lesson.   Oh well, it’s his money.

Most of the technical discussions about why streamers can sound different focus on issues of noise, jitter, memory buffers, and software implementation, and it is critical to recognize that existing methods for measuring equipment may not do a good job of evaluating differences in streamer sound quality.

I agree with this sentiment, I would also add that the final litmus test is (and must be) the listener, so for people to go on measuring things without listening to them, and somehow being able to extrapolate how the component will sound, is a futile approach. 

However, I will say that there are absolutely no audio components I've personally owned which would not be able to withstand the scrutiny of detailed measurements, whatever those are worth. I've listened to plenty of components which were merely ho-hum and boring with no musical enjoyment, and upon inspecting these components' measured results, over time it wasn't surprising to find the pattern - components which measure well do tend to sound better than components which do not.

That being said, just because a component measures well, does not mean it will sound good in your particular application or environment. Too many audiophiles/enthusiasts pay little attention to synergy and integration between components (particularly the room). I laugh every time I see gigantic loudspeakers in rooms entirely too small to support them. The purpose of this pursuit is to enjoy music - the gear is a means to that end. I've listened to countless high end systems and the few that actually play music always stand out - and it's usually because an industry guru spent hours fine-tuning each and every detail in a methodical, logical manner. 

As a tangent, next time someone is trying to convince you of a particular direction to take your audio system (i.e. sales person, reviewer, industry maven) I'd suggest asking that individual if they have ever spent any significant time either performing live music as a musician (surprisingly, many have) or has any experience with professional audio engineering (again, many have). In particular, an audio engineer should have some live music experience with sitting behind a mixing desk/console and running a live show (I know some recording guys who are deathly afraid of this which is why I mention it). 

The reason I mention this is that the professional audio world tends to have a deeper knowledge of the inner workings of questions like this, which the consumer and "high-end" audio world tend to obfuscate and avoid. The answers are there for those willing to put in the time and the work; if you really want to learn, consider spending the money to obtain an AES membership and delve into the plethora of white papers which can "technically" describe what is happening under the hood with all of these various processes. Unfortunately, what I've seen is that most enthusiasts are simply not interested in this level of research and would prefer to regurgitate misleading or plain wrong information. It's not surprising to me when I've listened to the systems many of these types of folks assemble have absolutely no meaningful communication of the program material and instead represent some fanciful interpretation which seems to suck out the very soul of the music, leaving an anemic shell of a presentation.

Meandering back to the point I originally wished to make - when people provide blanket statements such as "digital is digital" or "as long as it achieves this and that measured spec, it will be fine" simply put their ignorance on display to those who actually know how to assemble a proper music playback system. If they wish to continue to enjoy piss-poor music quality while spending loads of cash on nonsensical ideas, it is their prerogative, but they disservice others wishing to enjoy music at a truly elevated level. I've seen it at each and every level of the HiFi industry, and I won't be surprised when many of the "me-too" brands fade over the next few years while the innovators and pole position brands continue to press ahead and leave others in the dust.

Bet if you did a blind test, most people would buy the BlueSound Node2i.  I added a DAC and had to sell it on Audiogon.  The BlueSound sounded better on its own.  I call it the Emperor's New Cloths syndrome.  If you spend more, you convince yourself it sounds better.  However, I am sure streamers costing $3000 to $5000 must sound better.  How much better is the real question?  Do they sound $2,500 to $4,500 better?  

As you have discovered, you will get different opinions on ASR and Audiogon in response to your question about whether there is a point to buying a higher priced streamer.

Here on Agon, you have heard either that (1) all streamers should pretty much sound alike (so buy based on cost, features, and ease of use) or that (2) some streamers sound better than others and you should listen to enough of them to decide what sound differences matter to you. Most of the technical discussions about why streamers can sound different focus on issues of noise, jitter, memory buffers, and software implementation, and it is critical to recognize that existing methods for measuring equipment may not do a good job of evaluating differences in streamer sound quality.

On ASR, you have heard that streamers cannot sound different because they are digital devices that only process 1's and 0's. (For a differing opinion, check out Darko's discussion of this issue, if you haven't already.) The ASR approach is typically to measure first and then listen later (or even not at all), without making an honest attempt to overcome the confirmation bias of "sameness" for digital devices. ASR also makes assumptions about how small differences in noise or distortion can be used to judge the sound quality of equipment even in the absence of data to establish that correlation reliably (e.g., ranking DACs primarily on SINAD measurements). 

If the ASR approach works for you, that's your decision to make, but it's not actually science-based because audio science does not yet have valid measurements for everything the human brain-ear can process. I would instead take the approach of many others on this thread and urge you to listen to different streamers and confirm whether you can hear any differences that matter to you. If you've already done enough listening and don't hear differences under similar conditions, then you can buy whatever inexpensive streamer is reliable and easy to use. Given the reasonably generous budget you describe, however, it would make sense to do a bit more comparative listening before wholeheartedly embracing the "flat-earth" opinions voiced by our friends at ASR.

It seems like for a bunch of enthusiasts, no one really knows what they are talking about around here...

Allow me to provide a hint - anyone who thinks that AirPlay is "indistinguishable" from other methods of data delivery on a network has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. You should not listen to these people, they have no insight to offer, and your enjoyment of music will suffer as a result (I'm speaking as someone who listens to music. not gear).

To also slightly illuminate your awareness as to why purely rational, knowledgable individuals are willing to part with hard-earned cash to improve their listening experience in this particular arena, I offer the following sliver of technical analysis as to what is really happening with audio and streaming.

AirPlay is flawed because it is using kernel-layer audio processing on the device one is using to play back the audio. This alone means the signal itself is suspect as it may not be bit-perfect (and usually isn't). Not to mention, sample rate conversion on the device and in the player/playback software (which itself may be considered as a "component" in your digital audio system, much like a CD transport - it's just virtual so most pay no attention to it) can dramatically affect sound quality before it is delivered over the network to the endpoint. Sure, it works (meaning, the 1's and 0's sent by the device arrive at the endpoint intact as they were sent) but most have no idea of flaws in the playback software (application layer) they are using, let alone the fact that the device uses kernel audio post-software (so there are two competing processes at work).

This is why so many "audiophiles" use bit-perfect programs such as Audirvana on their Mac or PC (I also remember Amarra, and personally used programs such as this one when I was using a Windows machine to play digital music: https://sourceforge.net/p/playpcmwin/wiki/PlayPcmWinEn/)

The answer for the OP should be - please don't play music from your iPad at all. Use your iPad as a control point, not a playback device, and buy a computer or device that provides bit-perfect output to your DAC (or better yet, has a high-quality DAC built in). Those suggesting a Raspberry Pi are on the right track, but much of their reasoning is flawed (digital is digital).

As an analogy, very few in the digital video or imaging world would have any problem acknowledging the dramatic affects software processes (embedded or otherwise) can have on the final image results. The idea that audio is somehow different is simply ludicrous.

Sangbro – 

Thanks for the followup.  I now agree with you:  ASR is your best source for what you are looking for.  

If your objective function is the most provably well-measuring (by scientific devices, not your years) end result for cheapest dollars spent, that is a good path.

As long as that will make you happy, and the question of "well does it actually sound enjoyable to a human" is 2nd order of importance or maybe even irrelevant, you should be all set.

^Actually this thread is about “streamers” not DAC’s, though some streamers have built in DAC’s.

As a recent subscriber to Audiogon and the world of the audiophile, I find this discussion on DACs very interesting. And also as someone with a limited budget it’s interesting to hear from people who run through various DACs seeking a ’better sound’ like they’re trying different brands of razor blades.

My questions may show my ignorance about DAC technology but they are thus: With limited access to audio showrooms how does one sample the qualities of different DACs without actually listening to them? Is there a ’DAC of the month’ rental club?

How far away are we from a ’variable’ DAC that, instead of ’bass, treble, balance’ controls you’d have ’instrument separation, nuance accentuation, etc’ for fine tuning your sound.

Speaking for myself, I recently purchased a Bluesound Node 2i and am thrilled with what I’m hearing.

f your connection to your DAC is coax or USB, then there is the potential for noise entry which can impact jitter which can impact sound.

If the entry is coax or fiber and the DAC is recovering timing info from the digital I/F that can be an issue.

The Node2i has a setting for jitter reduction that seems to makes things worse. Electrically noisy and coax out ... It's not a viable comparison point.

Goes isolated USB and pretty much every argument goes out the window. No jitter, no electrical noise.

Ignore people making comments using NOS DACs as they are highly dependent on the data rate they are fed so variability is understandable.

Take our electrical noise and jitter and what is left? Nothing, unless there is intentional manipulation of the data stream.

The trusty old Radio Shack sound meter does not have the resolution for level matching and take with a grain of salt that a dealer would properly level match which you never do with a sound meter you do with a test tone and a multimeter. However it's a digital stream. You should not have to level match at all ... Unless manipulation of the stream is happening.

It's quite simple in my mind as I waited really long before I got one.

Generally well made servers sound as good, or better than your decent CD transport in playback.
 
And a good server should make no difference in playback quality if the file is pulled from streaming, or is a CD rip placed in the servers internal SSD, or it's from your NAS drive.

Once you find and hear a server brand like that (and there are a few that I have heard - Grimm Audio and SGM Taiko come to mind) then you will know why these servers are dearer.

I am sure there are lots of other streamers that do well too, that I may have not come across.

When you use a Node 2i, it does the streaming.
You have a Bluesound app for managing your music and what you play over wifi, but you aren't streaming from your handheld device, so you don't degrade the sound with Bluetooth or Airplay. 
My Node 2i is connected to my 1 Gb fiber internet connection.
I'm sure the Node 2i doesn't compare to streamers costing 10-15 times as much, but for the money, it provides excellent SQ.

I tested multiple "steamers" but didn't scratch the surface as there are so many out there. In the end, I felt the DAC made the biggest difference. I tested several combos but it is really futile as there are soooo many.

In the end, I chose a Streamer that checked off boxes for every major streaming service and a cd ripper. (I still buy cds along with the vinyl pressing if possible) At some point though, I will try other steamers.. its just last on my list right now.