Sound Quality of red book CDs vs.streaming

There was an article in Sound On Sound about 10 years ago on jitter and how it was not really a problem for good modern dacs and like I said this was 10 years ago. The article did say if you are chaining multiple dacs then you would want an external clock but how many do that in a home situation.

I used the
High quality downloads
Companies like DGG 24-96......
And other companies
And I had software that I do not remember right now
EKSAKT COPY  is the same if I remember correctly
And friends' quality files.
In all shapes
DSD
PLAC
24/192 OR AUDIO ON CD  BY "LSO" RECORDING 
All my comparisons are good and good hours and hours
Listen through OPPO 105D
 DAC and other high-quality devices
All from HHD Hard disk
The files were transferred to the DAC via a 105D stream

The comparison was directly opposite the same recording .

Always the best result is most originally on top of the same CD / SACD
 It is currently using the DAC R2R of the devices
Sounds best to me and does not mess with it anymore
I have more than 500 GB and no one gives me sound even from tuner of the Sony 707ES

TECHNICS SLP-990 1987 has more life and detail and 3D sound than the best files
files
It simply does not equal SA-11 S1 or nDAC
With a transport of Danon DCD-3560
16 / 44.1
Including file transfer via Strummer to the NIAC DAC
To the SPL PHONITOR  2headphone amplifier TO
SONY Z1R
HE EDION V2 and more
 All I heard from friends with
DSC Debussy and Source Top Class File 24/192 Klemperer / Symphony No. 2 of Mahler.
With LUXMAN P-1U HD800 + SUPERB CABL

We put the disc out of 1989's EMI before today's remestring

Still the disc sounds better with the 16/44.1 CD
WAY 

You know better
You may have top class equipment in it
The files sound better
But very few files I heard
Who says I can sleep with them really do not

So I'm from old generation quality transport + good DAC
Or a quality CD of the 80-90 years sounds like 
DENON DCD-3560
MARANTZ SA-11 S1
  NAIM DAC
SONY XA-50ES
SLP-990 IT SOUND SUPERB 1987 AND TODAY 2018 AS WALL
  Even better than the up-to-date sound of OPPO 105D
Or appliances at a reasonable level up to $ 3,500

@mzkmxcv 

+1 The J-Test is a pretty conclusive stress test. No jitter artifacts is a pretty strong indication that jitter is not going to be a problem. I have pointed this out to Steve before but he ignores this fact (for obvious reasons).
 

I tried every possible way
With different types of equipment 105D / REGA DAC
NIAM DAC .......
All PLAC file DSD WAV

No one sounds better than CD 16./44.1
The closest to WAV is also in the form of a file and also in the form of CD burning
Closer but does not have the sound of a CD

In two complete player shapes such as SA-11 S1
Or NAIM DAC
 + Transport COX connection is better than optical audio
DENON DCD-3560 An amazing transport
Only {also as an amazing solo player but a different story}
Sounds better than any file
Attack ... Depth / Height / Stage Width ... Timber
And more rhythm and playing are not all together
But one next to the other and as if each one is playing solo.

Nice experience to get the sound of my basic equipment ...  needs thousands of dollars
So I already have thousands of CDs
Which I think sounds better than Strimermer  ....
Maybe I was annoyed a few but that's the truth

I just signed up for IDAGIO.  I can't put it down!  This thing is going to ruin me.  For three nights in a row I have been up past my bedtime listening to music.  I think that anybody who is into classical music should give it a try!

@audioengr

You are talking about measuring the picoseconds worth of jitter (which does need to be in the MHz region). I am talking about doing a J-Test and finding out how the jitter will affect the passband after being reduced with a DAC, which would show up as any added noise to the waveform. It’s the same test Stereophile uses. I do not know the psec equivalent, but it is stated as worst case scenario, and when paired with even a cheap-ish DAC like the Topping D50, any jitter with using the CCA via optical was reduced to below -130dBFS, much lower than any residential noise floor.

@jafant 

Yes please explain....Have you heard a quality streaming system?

lalitknot at all...

Mahler123,

Have you tried IDAGIO?  It’s exclusively for classical.  Wonderful search engines designed for the music lover.  Only $10 per month.

Streaming services such as Spotify and Apple have huge catalogs.  I listen to Classical exclusively and generally am able between the 2 to find any recording, provided it is in print.
  Several caveats apply.  Both services have search engines optimized for non classical.  There are many times that the Verdi scenario you described happens, even if you type in the names of the Conductor, performers, etc.  with repeated search attempts you will hit paydirt, but it can be frustrating.  And don’t even think of having Siri find the correct recording; Apple voice recognition is god awful.  Amazon might be better with Alexa, but somehow I doubt that it will be attuned to the subtleties of navigating a Classical catalog, and I have found Amazon Music to have less depth of catalog for Classical compared to Spotify or Apple Music.
  The next caveat is sound quality, as all the services mentioned are essentially MP3 quality. They can still sound pretty darn good, but pale in comparison to High Rez Streaming.  If you live in the U. s., High Rez Streaming means eithe Primephonic, which has a very limited catalog, or Tidal, which is poorly organized for Classical and doesn’t begin to approach the breadth of catalog of Apple or Spotify 

@jafant,

“Streaming...etc., still has a long way to go”

Would you mind sharing your streaming setup? 

@georgehifi

+1 re Linn CD12 cd player. I had the CD12 in the past and it was excellent and was probably one of the most musical sounding CD player back then and even by today standard the Linn CD12 is still considered a reference CD player but limited to CD resolution or CD quality.

If you compare the Linn CD12 to Linn Klimax DS, especially the latest generation of the Klimax DS with Katalyst DAC architecture, the Linn Klimax DS, with the latest Katalyst DAC architecture, outperforms the CD12 by large margin. Not to mention that with the Klimax DS you can access to high resolution downloads. Even when playing cd quality (16/44.1) download files the Klimax DS outperforms the CD12 by large margin. Even the previous or older gen Klimax DS with non Katalyst DAC architecture still outperforms the CD12 player.

rvpiano
stick with your dedicated cd player. Streaming...etc., still has a long way to go, IMO.  Happy Listening!

Analog is largely a medium problem--how good is the vinyl cutters, the vinyl stampers, the needles, tonearms, turntables and preamplification?

Digital is a data and compute problem, although the CD is a pretty flimsy piece of crap to put the data on.  If you eliminate the CD, then "data is data" and it's not that hard to get it to the DAC for computation.  Streaming eliminates the piece-of-crap CD from the equation.  So does playing the data out computer memory.  CD will be buried next to floppy disks, cassettes, and 8-track as necessary evils eclipsed by technological progress.

@audioengr  
 
I’d genuinely like to know why. ASR measured the jitter reduction inherent with his AP by doing a J-test with a Toslink loop, then measured the Toslink output of the CCA (using the same cable I would assume), so if the jitter reduction was any worse, it would should up, and the differences were near non-existent.

The music that I like that is missing from streaming is historic recordings (78s) and ethnic music.  If they are under copyright protection, one cannot hear back earlier that 1928 recordings without copyright infringement.  As to 78s in general, when Marston and Romophone recordings appear on streaming, that would be nice (highly unlikely).  The problem with streaming these labels would include the loss of the comprehensive booklets that give recording and historical details concerning the CDs.  Streaming is best for new music.

Using a DAC to measure jitter using J-test is insufficient and the wrong way to characterize digital sources. It’s okay for characterizing the jitter added by a DAC, but not for digital sources. Digital sources are accurately characterized only by DIRECT measurement, not with a AP system. It must include both the period distribution and the spectrum plots.

The better than -275dBFS is a direct measurement. However, the jitter out of a Topping D50 with the CCA as it’s source was what I was talking about as being better than -130dBFS. So while that latter test doesn’t detail the jitter exclusively from the CCA, it gives the total jitter of the system, which is better than human hearing in a residential room.

Thanks to the politics that audio is becoming and the magazine pushing the current trend the fact is formats don't make a great recording, that happens in the studio and the final release production of that performance on any format.  If poorly recorded, highly compressed, fake effects etc tracks laid down from bits and piece of instruments recorded at different locations then mixed together for the final performance where the producer gives the sound they like so no matter the format it is not going to sound good.

I've had many poor vinyl recordings and some very good ones, same for CD's, many really good ones and the early era of CD's many poor ones, but never was it the format, it was the care taken to get it right, and back in the early days of CD's the record companies rushed to get product to the market, thus the best masters were never used, care taken to master them right was not taken, the rush was to get "clean" sounding recordings out to the market. It was the decision of the record companies that made many 1st release sound so bad. 

Our systems are all colored and the more add on's/tweaks you use the more the sound is changed, so this lie of the absolute sound it just marketing, our systems can never achieve that, what we all should strive for is a system we personally find the music we play enjoyable.  Be it tubes, solid state, the new class D amps, CD, Vinyl and the king of them all now days streaming, which I do not do and never plan to. I own more music than I can play in a years time and then some.

I am experienced to know that I don't need another format so I can spend more money buying what I already own, and to burn CD's or vinyl to an SSD, NAS etc. I personally enjoy owning a whole recording, not just buying the songs I like and making compilations,  streaming songs is in the billions though, CD 2nd and vinyl 3rd in sales both combined are far below streaming songs  in sales which the mass public does buy and they can listen on their buds from their cell phones, stream it wi-fi to their speakers through their house or rooms if they want. They want portable audio and that is the focus of the record business not if high-end systems are going to play those recordings. Their needs are not audiophile needs, they only want the music and they are happy listening in a sub-par system, cell phones, desktop speakers etc.  

I know no one in my family or work life who own a system even at $1,000, most have a digital radio, XM/Sirus, Spotify etc. Now MQA another format to get us to rebuy old stuff and that's not going to make it either because 99% of the public does not care about sound quality and you think they care about another recording format? Hell I don't and I collected music for 60 years and I started at 8 years old. Now I am going out to buy new gear so I can process MQA and then rebuy the same recordings again because they are MQA? Then MQA is gone at some point. You read the magazines and they keep on pushing and pushing the format almost in hysteria. 

For any format to survive the general public has to buy it, so even if it is a better sounding format, that matters little if the format of recording does not go mainstream, it will always be a very small niche market, and us as audiophiles are a super niche market and with the hobby dying and sales drying up we see the treat now to market to the upper 5% in wage earners, as the middle class no longer has the funds nor the interest in their view of wasting money on audio gear when they have families to raise, kids to put through school etc and want portable personal audio.

I owned vinyl that sounded better than the CD release, and CD's that killed the vinyl and the reason why were the final masterings and the mixing.

Our hobby is a luxury they cannot afford. Looking at the reviews the stuff they review (the majority, not all) I could never afford and I make good money. My system is not cheap and it took years to build, but my system is a drop in the bucket by today's high-end gear. Enjoy the music and stop worrying about the format, as you become more experienced you weed out the bad and keep the good in any format but you never going to hear the "master tape" sound at home, reviewers are not like the reviewers 30 years ago, today they are an arm of manufactures and help promote sales, and some audiophiles follow them like sheep. Your room is not their room, your gear, not their gear and so what they say will matter little, much like going to an audio store if you are lucky enough to have one, what you hear there is not what you will hear at your home either.

30 years ago I heard systems that stick in my mind today, no thousand dollar power cords, thousands more in cables, and accessories, power conditioners etc. Wonder how we evr got to where we are at today? 

@drbarney1 

With all due respect, I think you're a bit off topic. This discussion thread isn't about downloading song titles and storing them locally.  It's about is the sonic quality of RedBook CDs better than using a streaming service such as Tidal HiFi. With streaming services you don't typically store any song titles locally, so there's no need for a 'music server' as you refer to. 

I know all about downloading song titles from HDTracks as I've spent far too much money doing so before Tidal HiFi became available. Why do you think download sales on HDTracks.com are slumping? It's because many albums they sell are available on Tidal in MQA format for the same $20/month fee, many in 192k/24 bit format (please don't start an MQA debate here). You also don't need the aggravation of downloading and storing the HDTracks titles, which requires a computer which shouldn't be in the signal path of your system for a variety of reasons.  You also need lots of disk storage, usually a SAN device so you can back up your investment of downloaded songs. 

No need for all that extra required time, equipment, power and interconnect cables any more with streaming.

@rvpiano

I don't think there's a cost analysis that would show that purchasing CDs is less costly than music streaming services such as Tidal, even if Tidal was to double the price. Tidal gives you real-time access to over 40 million songs directly via most network streamers at home or via smart phone. I understand that you're likely only interested in listening to a fraction of them, but even if you purchase 1 - 2 CDs a month, you're spending more than a Tidal HiFi subscription. 

How many times have you read an equipment review where a reviewer noted a particular song or album that was produced extremely well or had incredible bass reproduction and you didn't have it in your CD collection? Do you really want to spend the time and money to purchase it for $15 - $18 or just cue it up on Tidal as you're reading the review?  I cued up songs this morning via Tidal for a review of the Rockport Atria speakers where the reviewer cited many song titles for bass reproduction.  Doesn't get better than that.

Just for the hell of it I looked up the prices of downloads and is it just my imagination or are some downloads just as expensive as buying a CD? Music servers are so expensive and a clocking buffer in a good DAC should eliminate any difference in the sources of an identical stream of bits from the same recording. Is the convenience of a server thousands of dollars worth the trivial inconvenience of taking a CD from a shelf and putting it in a player?

Cycles2,

You may be right on about artists and streaming.  But do you really think streaming will not be much more expensive in the future?

I agree about Tidal.  I find myself listening to it most of the time.  I am blessed that I can't tell the difference between the same digital file presented to my DAC by different digital sources.

cycles2:  your comments regarding artists is smack on.  For years we have been bullied by record companies feeding us whatever they can sell profitably, and hyping up photogenic pop stars and producing massively compressed recordings seems to be the best way they can maximize their profit.  The democratization of quality recording and digital distribution has changed the game.  Music is supposed to be fun and participatory, not the sole domain of record companies and over-payed pop stars trying to make money.

@rvpiano
Are you serious about what will artists do if CDs go away? Digital recording and streaming have opened the door for hundreds of artists that can't afford the cost and bureaucracy of getting their songs onto CD or vinyl. Many artists are discovered via a streaming service such as Tidal or other music channels from digital files they put together in their home studios for a fraction of what it cost 10 years ago.

I haven't purchased a CD ever since I got a decent network streamer (sorry, BlueSound Node 2's are not decent streamers), got rid of any extra equipment in the signal path such as a computer that introduces jitter and other unwanted sonic artifacts and purchased a Tidal HiFi subscription (the standard $10/month won't do as these music files are compressed).

I have an Ayre CD transport and none of my HiFi friends can tell the difference between Redbook CDs on the Ayre of via Tidal HiFi.  You also get the benefit of listening to Tidal remotely via your phone and anywhere you have a BlueTooth audio connection such as your car.

Streaming is truly one of the biggest values we audiophiles have going for us.

If the quality of the sound we hear was only based on which gear measured the best, we would all have Benchmark components in our systems. Every other manufacturer would close shop, certainly the ones with tube electronics. There's a lot more than just measurements that creates the emotional engagement that music brings to our lives.  

Try Idagio.  The largest catalog of classical music I know of,  and you can get uncompressed CD-quality streaming.

@audioengr

You don’t give specs as to what dBFS or psec your product is; you’ve stated 7psec before, so I’ll assume that, the ChromeCast Audio has less than 4psec (better than -275dBFS / 45Bit). If your product is better, I’ll retract my statement. Again though, even if your re-clocker was 0psec, the differences are not even close to audible, so spending $700 one one would be waste of money in this instance.

Even the $100 Khadas Tone board DAC has a J-test result of -135dBFS, which allows for more dynamic range than we can hear in a room (say 140dB max and a room noise floor of 30dB, so 110dB; and that 140dB is generous, most music is mastered to 105dB, with some orchestral/classical getting to 120dB).

A ChromeCast Audio hooked up to a “cheap” Topping D50 DAC, using normal cables, produced a J-test of better than -130dBFS, also better than our hearing in a room.

If using Roon or Android Hi-Fi Cast (most any app/software except Google’s own), the jitter in the ChromeCast Audio is better than -275dBFS (better than 45Bit). @audioengr’s re-clocker will actually introduce more jitter in this case. It’s only if you Cast with YouTube or your Chrome Browser will the re-clocker actually reduce the jitter; however, any good DAC will be audibly the same for cheaper, $700 for a re-clocker is silly when a $250 SMSL SU-8  DAC has jitter below -120dBFS, what is considered out hearing range (some say 140dB), and accounting for room noise, it’s more than enough.

I find cd is better than hard drive AND streaming through my MSB Transport and DAC. 

In the chain below, Tidal 16/44 sounds better than Redbook, MQA sounds much better (afraid I might become an MQA junkie), and I can't hear a difference between FLAC and Tidal streaming.  I have to go back and try WAV.  My disc spinning has nearly stopped as a result.

Also intend to try better ethernet cable, based on what I've read here on the 'Gon, currently have cheapo, want to try Supra.  For what it's worth, I think PS Audio believes transmission via ethernet to be superior to toslink, upc, can't remember why tho.  

Oppo 105D via AQ toslink or Tidal/Roon from modem via ethernet -> PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC with Bridge II.

The Sony HAP-Z1ES doesn't do Tidal, so I have a separate unit just for Tidal. CD's were way better than streaming, for me. I tried analog and digital connection methods and couldn't get it close. Now, Hi Res is a different story...

For a while I was doing Room/Tidal, but I found no motivation to spend time burning CDs. I had some that I had burned previously, and Roon picked them up just fine, but I found myself just going straight to Tidal 90 percent of the time. So now I’m CDs, records, and Tidal.

As far as quality goes, I’m just fine with 16/44.1. I can hear no perceptible difference between the same files played from different media (same file sent to the same DAC). Your signal path, and the components you use, will of course effect sound quality.

I’m sure that some of you have the knowledge, experience, and the sufficient hearing ability to discern audible differences caused by jitter, oversampling, hi-res, etc. I certainly can. But I am perfectly satisfied with a well recorded and mastered 16/44.1 file.

I also used minimserver and upnp for my prior music servers and Roon is head over heals better than either. I still use an Auralic Mini for a music server in my living room setup. When I use Auralic’s DS Lightning software, I have to use minimserver for my ripped/purchased music off my server. Once I could use Roon on the Auralic Mini, I stopped using minimserver with no looking back.

@rvpiano, nothing wrong with your choice of reclocker. Many happy owners. It does require a long break in period. Run some heavy metal from a streamer thru it 24/7 or use a CD transport. A burn-in disk or file works best.

The weak link is the switch mode power supply...the wall-wart.

At this point my Cyrus CD transport is clearly outperforming streaming, but I guess it may take a while for the reclocker to settle in.

For my ears,  Roon / Tidal via my Oppo 203 is same or better than my red book cd's. I have not touched a red book cd in over a year after getting this set up going unless its something really rare. The ability to quickly explore artists and new music, read about the albums and artists,   along with what I perceive to be same or better quality is a good solution for me. Even better digital equipment in the future will only yield even more favorable results to my ears.   

The quality of the transport has a definite bearing on  the ultimate  sound produced when we’re comparing.

Definitely. I have used an ARC, NAD, Onkyo, and PS Audio. Each had a different presentation and sonic signature. A major factor contributing to their sound quality is how well jitter is controlled before data is output to the DAC.
The PSA PWT is a memory player and has an advantage over a standard CDP digital output since it re-reads the disc to correct errors and then loads it into memory. So it is playing back a low jitter data stream from a buffer rather than playback from a disc.

I added the iFi iPurifier to see if I could do even better with my digital chain. With the LPS, SQ is noticeably improved.
I must add that the digital cable is an important part of the chain.

Question:  Does a reclocker have to “break in” like everything else?

The iFi does need about 200 hours break-in. 
My LPS sounded fantastic out of the box and improved after leaving it powered up for a couple of weeks.

I looked at many high quality LPS’s which were in the $400+ range. I didn’t want to spend that much, so I took to the archives.
Good user reviews for Swagman Labs (based in Hong Kong). I purchased the SIGNATURE EDITION which has all upgraded parts and a 50VA toroidal transformer. Price was $280 and it is built for digital devices.

I liked the fast and detailed info from Swagman when contacted before my purchase. 

rvpiano, LPS stands for linear power supply. The idea is they can be an upgrade from the standard, cheap switching power supplies normally included with many devices from the factory. 

Good thread. I'd like to upgrade my streaming equipment at some point but don't want to spend a fortune on pieces which might not offer much bang for the buck. Best of luck!

rvpiano

Will do for the DAGIO. 

I agree the quality of the spinner has a definite bearing. I have a Bryston BCD-3 that  IMO, extracts the ultimate from my CDs.