2. digital
  3. 154436-20253

Streamers and bit rot.

In audio land, I see streamers as being complicated and subject to what we call "bit rot" in the software industry. It really means that over time, the code that used to work may no longer work because the environment around them is moving on. It doesn't mean the code becomes buggy, but fails to keep up. A modern streamer has three different areas where code must interface to the outside world:

  1. The services being streamed (Quboz, Spotify, Tidal, etc.)
  2. The USB DAC - Drivers must exist for each chipset.
  3. The user interface - iOS, Android, web
If you are an audio manufacturer, say, Parasound or Ayre and you want to make a streamer you have to solve all of these issues. Those require developers. OK, so you pay your Android and Tidal developer. They go away, and Tidal adds a new feature or a new service like Amazon streaming comes in. Got to go find developers again.  Apple releases a new iOS and your old Android app is now dead. What are you going to do?  This happens with some frequency and all but the most basic of apps "rot" over time.

This is very different than the software-less EE world in which your core expertise may lie in. I mean, even if you use some microcontroller to handle your inputs/levels and bass management it's still a lot simpler, and fewer lines of code to manage and keep up. 

So, my dear fellow A'goners, what brands to you trust to keep up and how did you solve this issue?
erik_squires

Showing 9 responses by erik_squires

erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
Good to know. I’ve heard some say that more expensive DACs will have jitter reducing (reclocking?) built in to their various inputs.


Not really how it works. I mean, expensive is a relative term. Look at the Stereophile jitter measurements for Mytek Brooklyn (~$2K) and the dCS Bartok (~ $16k). Their jitter performance is equivalent.

Both have excellent jitter reduction, but they don’t necessarily rely on sample rate conversion, which some re-clockers (Wyred4Sound’s Remedy for instance) do.

Part of this is also time. As we’ve moved forward in time even inexpensive DACs now provide excellent jitter rejection. Not true of every DAC, of course, but for isntance the Topping DX3 is an under $1k DAC with excellent jitter rejection.
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
So, for now, I use a discontinued Chromecast Audio with iFi reclocker. Both the reclocker and power cable upgrade for the CCA dramatically improved my system. I’m happy with this setup for now as I don’t really know how a more expensive streamer will compare.


My experience with reclockers aligned closely with ASR’s findings: Great DACs don’t need reclockers. I also found that, as you might expect, the quality of those tiny devices as digital sources was mediocre.



Best,

E
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
Right?? We could mix Sonos/Roon/ Whatever.

Also, great if the streaming companies had a common API too.
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
All of this needs to be standardized, and then the geniuses can proceed from there. Once the parameters are established, innovation can do it's thing.


It has been. USB 1.0 was a standard, as were every other USB standard up till now (with USB 4.0 waiting in the wings).

HDMI is now on what, version 2.2? 

<< sigh >>
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
Maybe instead of talking about gear being stable we should talk about what interfaces have stood the test of time. For instance, these are proven and long lasting:

  • RCA / XLR Interconnects
  • Speaker cables
  • Digital audio: S/PDIF, AES/EBU
  • The Internet TCP/IP
  • Phonograph cartridges (many, but configurable)

The interfaces I see as less stable over time:
  • HDMI
  • USB
  • Music services
  • Telephone operating systems and software

So anything relying on the second group is to me in higher flux. I list USB because it's' gone through many versions, we're up to at least USB 3.0 as well as many different connector types.

erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
Eric,. The Sony has a single USB in port that permits use of either an external hard drive or an external DAC.


Right, but you can't use the Sony as a standalone DAC. :(

DACs are stable in the sense of being usable, but not in the sense of holding market value.


True!! 
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
@djones51

I use bluOS which is part of Lenbrook Group, which might not be the size of Harmon I don't know but they do a good job of keeping the app and OS updated.



That to me seems like a great idea, especially if they do Android at the same time as iOS. I didn't mention it in my original post but Android and iOS developers are two different people, or at least two different projects.

The idea of multiple companies licensing from outside vendors is a great idea to me. This means they can continuously develop.

Reminds me of seeing a Maserati at a convention, and the salesperson told me the dash display electronics were built by Chrysler. At the relative volumes, I'm much more comfortable with the reliability of Chrysler and their phone interfaces than Maserati. :)
erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
It seems to me that all forms of digital playback are subject to early obsolescence.  CD players, DACs, and yes, streamers, become outdated much faster than amps, preamps, speakers, etc

Thank you, but I think of those, DAC's are now the most stable. We can buy a Theta Casanova and it will play 96kHz/24 bit still. :) How old is that? 1990's or so? Admittedly, DACs over the last 15 years or so are much better with much lower jitter figures.  I just looked at your streamer, it looks great! Shame it doesn't have digital inputs. :(

I think the suggestion above to go with some thing that uses a shared as opposed to proprietary software stack is a very good one. I use Roon, but BluOS seems to be good too.


erik_squires OP
16,594 posts
 
That aside, any company that relies on software for the proper operation of their product - which basically covers almost all technology and consumer electronics manufacturers, would have to be very dumb to just count on the continuity of employment of their software developers to sustain a successful business model.

I'm not exactly sure what you are getting at. I don't mean that you have to be prepared for developers to leave. I mean that from a product development lifecycle, there isn't really enough work to keep developers in all areas fully employed, so as a result anyone who isn't Harman sized has to hire consultants. A change will require a new project.

So, either you are in constant product development, justifying developers or you are on a project by project basis, and have serious fees incurred each time.

Unlike, say, an amplifier, which you pay to design once, and then you pretty much run it for 10 years if you can, or 20.
More to discover