Streaming vs. CD

Got a chance to listened to one of “The most expensive and the best Streamers Wadax”! The unit was quoted as the best streamer & Dac set up you can buy off the shelf.  I was there say 2 hrs listening to variety of tracks, just to see what all the hypes was about.   In my opinion, no way it can compete with a quality turntable! 

Discovered it was playing only out of 1 channel; apparently one of my cheap cables was defective.  The better cables arrived last night and now it sounds much better.
  However, I am using the “Cambridge Connect” app.  It doesn’t offer Qobuz, and the Chromecast doesn’t seem to work either. I will try Streammagic if I get a chance later.

Mahler123,

I mostly use Qobuz as my streaming service. It can be accessed both through AirPlay and built in Chromecast. It decodes Chromecast in hi res 96HZ, but sounds great in either mode.  I’m not sure why you can’t.get Qobuz. Are you using the Streamagic app?  If not, download it and follow directions.
I have the Cambridge connected to my Benchmark DAC with high quality cables. The most dramatic improvement in sound was with the addition of a $300 Audioquest power cable.to the Cambridge.
I find the unit to sound quite better than the Node.
Good luck on setting it up properly

I just added the same Cambridge streamer that the OP uses.  I bought it because of its claims to use mpegDASH to improve Internet Radio, and because I wanted to add an AirPlay device to my two channel system.  Unfortunately the RCA interconnects from Audioquest didn’t arrive so I had to use some cheap RCAs that I had laying around to connect to my pre amp.
  On the + side, it had no IT issues integrating into my system via Ethernet, and the Cambridge Connect App seems well thought out.  The AirPlay works fine  On the minus, I was disappointed that BBC Radio3 and my other favorite Internet stations are still showing a bit rate of 128kbps or below.  The Cambridge recognizes the files on my Melco N100 NAS but sounds pretty thin compared to both the Melco and my Oppo 105 playing the same files into my Bryston DAC.
I haven’t tried playing the Cambridge into the Bryston DAC —I’m out of cables for that as well.  Also, the Cambridge appears not to work with Qobuz.  Is the OP. using his to play Qobuz?  I can still play my Qobuz files with the Melco, so not a deal breaker, but I’d like to know  I had a Bluesound Node2  last week and to my surprise the DAC on the Node2 sounded much better, although the cabling was different.
  What to conclude?  Nothing at this point.  However it does reinforce my belief that when deciding what works best, streaming or CDs, it depends on the individual players 

I have read the articles on MQA but Tidal sounds good to me and my non-mqa dac shows 96k which is pretty high resution. The Doge 7 dac I use makes more difference in sound then getting the full unfold on my node's MQA dac. As far as provenance its not too hard to tell for many artists that my cd is same mix as the one online because there is only one mix.(ex. Van Hunt debut cd)
I do curate my cd collection and seek out the best mixes when there have been multiple issues over the years. Some hi res remasters are really good as aging rockstars finally dust off the true original masters and put out their best sounding cataloug yet uncompressed in hi res glory (led Zep comes to mind). Don't like licensing schemes but can't argue with great sound. Tidal or Quobuz through a good dac can be very engaging and indistinguishable from a transport playing the cd through the same dac when doing A,B comparisons in my experince

Yeah, and P. McGowen (PS Audio) also bought into it at first probably because the $$$ signs were flashing. Then later when this got out even before this vid, he quickly pulled out.
Now the same is happening with these mega dollar boutique ac mains fuses, some that have around 1000% mark up.
There’s a moto with these guys "follow the $$$"

Cheers George

According to GoldenSound over at YouTube, you will never know if what you're hearing via Tidal is HighRes or upsampled Redbook. His investigation goes into great depth on the MQA rip off and Tidal doesn't come out looking all that good as a result.
https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=7258
The video is almost 40 minutes but once you start, you won't be able to stop listening. 

All the best,
Nonoise

Once again it needs to be said.
All this A/B’ing means nothing, if you’re not listening to the same issue of the album in both a/b’s. Are you listening to the compressed re-issues v the non compressed original release.
Give us which one in your opening before saying anything on which sound better, and chances are you can’t because you can’t get the provenance with anything streamed or downloaded.

EG:
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=the+traveling+wilburys&album=

Remember "If there’s no quite there’s no loud" (dynamic range)
Listen/watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ&ab_channel=MattMayfieldMusic

Cheers George

I second Rvpiano. I use a node2i and with an upgraded powercord and cabling I can't tell the difference between Tidal or Qobuz at 44.1 and the same mix played over my transport through a Doge 7 tube dac. Hires up to 192 can sound a little crisper and clearer then 44.1 but the same bit rates sound exactly the same from either service (although only Quobuz goes to 192 with my dac, tidal limited to 96k). Sounds almost comparable to dsd in fact but nothing beats SACD surround (ex. EJ Tumbleweed Connection through low jitter connection direct to AV is best I've ever heard). Surprisingly, the XM app sounds excellent and a little different than other service although only cd quality. It has a bassier more powerfull sound and I suspect either maybe some smiley face eq happening. I like smiley eq and need it in my car otherwise my Focals sound way too bright and I can't crank them. I still like to buy SACD for the surround content but see no reason to buy CDs with my current setup and all these services. We are living in a golden age for music selection AND quality!

It’s now two years since my original post.  Since then I’ve acquired a whole new setup, including a new DAC (Benchmark) and streamer (Cambridge.) Now the SQ of streaming, using Qobuz or Idagio, is virtually indistinguishable from my CD transport (Cyrus.) I never though it was possible.  One factor in the equation was the purchase of a new streamer power cord ((Audioquest.). Made a major difference.

One conundrum on this issue I have not been able to resolve in my mind is that almost without exception CD playback is always better than 'equal' streamed playback.  

I tried to isolate all the variables in equipment and playback and always got the same result.  Then I bought a Marantz ND8006 - and the same is true.  You may know that with this unit, as a CD and network player, the DAC is the same onboard.  But when I playback a CD against the same version of a song from Tidal or Amazon HD the CD always wins, better top end, more 'air', better imaging, timing etc. You may say that Tidal and Amazon HD are not actually CD quality - but they are pretty pretty pretty close.  Still the CD playback is easily distinguishable - and since it is all playing from the same unit it eliminates potential for other variables to influence the outcome (different cables etc).  Maybe there is still a clocking/jitter difference between the CD output to the DAC and the streamed signal to the DAC - but it seems not very likely.  

I have not yet compared it with a downloaded FLAC or other high res file but I wouldn't be surprised to still find for some strange reason the CD still sounding better again even on a unit like the Marantz ND8006  - bits are not just bits for whatever reason.  I don't get it. 

 I stream using Qubuz through my Aurender music server/streamer.  I purchased the Aurender ACS-10 unit because it allows for ripping my CDs to the internal hard drive and also to a backup NAS. 

Listening to the music via the internal hard drive vs the streamed music, I can tell the difference slightly, but just slightly most times.  But, when I put a CD on my CD/transport unit into my DAC and listen and then switch to the Aurender unit (either streamed music via Qubuz or via internal hard drive), all into my Audio Research DAC, seriously, 100% of the time, the CD into the DAC sounds noticeably better.  

Don't get me wrong, the Aurender into the Audio Research DAC 9, either streamed or via the internal hard drive sounds excellent.  which is why I purchased the Aurender unit in the first place.

It's just that my CD transport into the DAC sounds better, more open and nice.  As an Engineer, I can't explain this because the Aurender copies bit perfect.  Oh well.

A very good friend of mine was streaming to his Mark Levinson DAC via an Amazon Prime music streamer. He was okay with this.  CD to DAC was very much better.  Then he purchased a Cambridge streamer and it is wayyyy better than the Amazon Prime streamer.  But!!! the Mark Levinson CD/Transport to his Mark Levinson DAC is still better than his streamer to DAC.

The good thing is that both now make him smile and enjoy.

enjoy

Thanks, @rvpiano!

I usually just use Roon for all my streaming needs nowadays, so Chromecast or Airplay modes are not of much use. I did try Airplay with Node 2i and agree that it was not all that good, same with Bluetooth.

I'll be on the lookout for a used CA CXN2 for sure.

arafiq,

Yes, the same DAC was used in both cases.
The Cambridge uses built-in Chromecast for hi-res files.
Downside is Chromecast streams only up to 96 kHz and inserts a brief pause between tracks. In Airplay mode there’s no pause but no hi-res.
However, the upside is that I believe the SQ to be better than
Node 2i in both modes no matter what the resolution  rate. To me, it’s just a fuller and more detailed sound. YMMD.

‘The Cambridge also has many features the Node doesn’t.
It’s worth a test try.

@rvpiano -- I'm glad to hear that the Cambridge CXN is working out for you. I remember reading one of your posts where I think you were not too thrilled with the Node 2i. 

When you say the Cambridge streamer is better than Node 2i, are you comparing them purely on the basis of streamer-only criteria, i.e. using an external DACs in both cases? I would really appreciate it if you can tell us what aspects of sound quality have improved going from Node to Cambridge. TIA.

Extensively modified Rega RP3 turntable.
Clearaudio Virtuoso cartridge.
Cyrus CD transport.
OPPO 105 universal player
GeerFab DBOB Digital Extractor.
‘Cambridge CXV2 streamer.
‘Benchmark DAC3B DAC.
Conrad Johnson PV 11 preamp modified with Teflon caps.
Benchmark AHB2 Amplifier.
GoldenEar Triton ! Speakers.
Various aftermarket cabling.

rvpiano

what gear is currently in your system?

Happy Listening!

I absolutely concur that a well recorded 16/24 CD or file can sound better than a hi-res recording.  Happens all the time.

Progressed through CD's on a NAIM 555, then a Naim ripper ripped CD's to NAS,  then Tidal HiRes.

Now running Aurender N10 into Devialet D400 with optimized cables everywhere. In my set up, nothing beats Tidal 24/192.

I would say though that a very well recorded and engineered CD at 16/44 has better sq than a crappy recording at 24/192. More quality is "created" in the recording study than can be "created" in the home system.

My CD collection is stored in the Aurender hard drive but is seldom visited since Tidal sq is generally equal or better and the selection is mind blowing. 

I have also found that cable upgrades (Ansuz and Transparent) have made the whole system more musical with listener fatigue eliminated.

Interesting to see this thread come up again yesterday, and glad that the OP has found a good solution.
In my world, the streamer does make a difference in how things sound, as do the transport or CD player if playing physical discs.  Still using Tidal here and happy with the (non-MQA) sonics.  I don’t hear much/any difference between streamed Tidal and playing ripped CDs through my server’s SSD.  After recent system changes/upgrades I am closer to trying Qobuz but it is really about the content.  Can any of you tell me whether Qobuz have improved their blues/rock/pop library, and whether they offer an autoplay feature like Tidal?  That autoplay feature has been great for me, both for convenience when having people over and not wanting to babysit the music selection and also for hearing new tunes or revisiting tunes I have forgotten about.  When it first came out, it seemed that Qobuz was known more for their classical content but if they have gotten closer to Tidal with the other genres, it is time for me to give them a try.  The autoplay feature would be a welcome plus.

I find Qobuz in hi-res really excellent for classical music. It’s gotten to the point on my system, for the first time, CDs sound identical to streaming. This was never the case previously.
‘Maybe it’s my new Cambridge streamer.

My conclusion as well.  It makes sense, as with streaming from a vendor such as Tidal or Qobuz, there are some variables we cannot control, such as ISP bandwidth and any any shenanigans that might occur with the content provider.  Streaming is pretty good, and most people might prefer it for convenience.  Burning a large CD collection to a HD can be a pain, but once accomplished for me a much better solution.  I use Qobuz for non classical music listening and to audition new albums

i just compared some lossless tracks from Tidal to the same tracks of my hard drive in FLAC.  hard drive wins hand down.  more atmospheric, harmonic decay.  good bye streamer, hello Quboz and Presto download store.

i am thinking of dropping my Tidal subscription but keeping my Spotify just to find some new stuff. if i than hear something i like i will buy a Flac download through Quboz or Band Camp. its just nice to have the file if you are up in Nepal away from the internet, which crashes constantly  and i am supporting the Artist

What is dying is computer audio as streaming has taken over.

Darn it, I didn't get the memo about this!  Or maybe "computer audio" is something different than what I consider computer audio.  I spend a lot of time at my computer(s) and have two full systems with integrateds, DACs, and headphone amps at both.  Most of the music I listen to on the computers is streamed through Qobuz or Tidal, which I think sounds great.  Oh, both systems also have a turntable in them.  And speakers.

CDs are far from dead. What is dying is computer audio as streaming has taken over.
https://twitteringmachines.com/computer-audio-is-dead-and-streaming-has-killed-it/
As long as there are CDs and LPs to play, they will stick around for the foreseeable future.

All the best,
Nonoise

The original recording techniques/room/gear makes at least as much difference as the bit/sample rate. I've heard some 16/44.1 releases that sounded phenomenal, and some 24/192 that were merely good. Of course a well engineered master streamed at 24/192 will probably sound better than a CD.

In my system, I generally prefer the sound quality of CD's over Tidal CD, Tidal MQA or Qobuz. I admit that I do usually listen to Tidal through my Aurender N10 since it is so simple to use and I don't need to get up and switch CD's. Streaming is usually good enough for me but CD's and SACD's win when I am being critical.

I stream Tidal Hifi with my bluesound  node2 to Mytek Brooklyn DAC with the Mytek doing the MQA decoding. It sounds great to my ear, CD quality or better. The big plus is the vast amount of music you can access and the ability to make playlists

I have an Aurrender streamer hardwired to my router and hooked up to a PS Audio  DirectStream Dac with the latest software upgrade(big improvement). My transport is a  2 belt  drive CEC TLN2 up-sampling transport  hooked up to the same PS Audio Dac.  (Even though I do not have a MQA decoder, the Tidal  MQA  files sound consistently better than non MQA  files, although some of the non MQA files on Tidal can sound very good without  MQA.) 
But the issue at hand is CD vs. Tidal and in general, CD sounds better than streaming at least thru my system. I will say, however, in some circumstances, I have found some of the higher res MQA files to better CD in sound quality. So I have found it really comes down to software. If everything on Tidal was a MQA excellent recording one wouldn't need CD  but that simply isn't the case. So both have their places in a system.  I am listening thru a tube preamp with a separate power supply, a Luxman low power tube amp and reasonably efficient Focal speakers. 

I find that streaming my own music over my wifi system is fantastic. Better than my transport by far! I have yet to commit to a service, but I am headed that way. I am able to get great quality over my "mesh" network up to 24/192. I hard wire my Raspberry Pi based streamer to my Orbi satellite.  Then into my DSpeaker X4. I may upgrade to Blue Sound soon. Just to see if it is better, but I doubt it.

good advice. 24 bit originals makes sense. I will gather some knowledge now.

@elliotbnew I suggest you contact Qobuz or look at their website perhaps to gain more info as I don't exactly know the answer to your questions. A quick look at their website indicated the following:

We do the preliminary work with recording studios, in partnership with record labels and film studios, to obtain 24-Bit Hi-Res files with an identical sound to that of the engineer’s studio master

three_easy_payments382 posts06-11-2019 1:15pmstreaming services like Qobuz offer three levels of audio quality:

- MP3 320 KBPS (compressed like Spotify)
- FLAC 16-BIT / 44.1 KHZ (this is CD quality)
- FLAC 24-BIT UP TO 192 KHZ (hi-res, better than CD)
............................................................

I'm an old dog, have stayed away from streaming, so I 'know nothing'. my friend, another old dog, loves streaming.

a few questions:

1. what is the source of these oversampled 24 bit files?

2. if not 24 bit 192khz master, isn't it 44 boosted for a marketing numbers game?

3. I have many regular and SACD versions of music, i.e. Oscar Peterson, created from higher rez masters. ... My focused listening conclusion is the difference is not the signal but the lower noise floor, especially quiet passages. (an argument can be made that it is an unnatural quiet). Is this lower noise floor what people are reacting to?

I have spent some time getting Qobuz and Tidal to sound as good as my high-end CD transport.  To start with CD was much better.  Now there is nothing in it.

 It took some time and each of these changes made an improvement:
- turning WiFi and Bluetooth off on the streamer 
- using shortest possible usb cable from streamer to DAC
- trying different usb cables - some did sound different. 
- introducing a Cisco network switch between the router and the streamer
- changing the Ethernet cable from Cat 5 to Cat 7 from router to switch and switch to streamer
- locating the network switch as close to the streamer so that the cable length is reduced in this section of the set up. 

Each improved the SQ.  

Antipodes DX3 server/Roon core into Metrum Ambre Roon endpoint then Metrum Adagio DAC, etc....
Usually hear no significant difference between ripped/stored CDs and (non-MQA) Tidal streaming but when I do, Tidal is almost always better sounding.  Either sound better to me than a CD player.  Would rather see Tidal adopt a hi-res format (even at a higher price), or for Qobuz to expand selections equal to Tidal, than to have to pay for a second streaming service so sticking with Tidal for now to get the best selection of the music I listen to.  Whatever they don’t have, I can rip and store on the DX.

peters,

You certainly seem to have some pretty hot gear.

A well recorded CD wil knock the u no what of a stream sound.
And better yet, it will always play once inserted.

I am dumping my Roon Nucleus. What a cluster!! Product, Service, support  they both tanked it.
In a couple years if new players move and do it right
I may return. For now it simply unreliable, 3rd level sound.

I stream on my bedroom system via Tidal using a a Node2 into a Benchmark DAC3. I also play cd rips off a NAS drive. To me, the ripped files sound better than the Tidal stream, MQA included. I’m wondering if something is wrong with my Node2 settings. Or???

Tidal HiFi with MQA is better than any CD on my system. I stream via a LUMIN D1 for the last 4 years. CDs and albums cannot compete.

happy listening!

I find that getting to 24 bits makes a big difference to me although the higher bit rates don't seem to matter as much. I find CD quality to be dried out.

I use Tidal and I cannot tell the difference.  I hard wired my modem using CAD6 cable to my Apple TV hard wired CAD6 up the back of my receiver.  I wonder if I would hear a noticeable difference if I used a Blue Note to stream?

to be honest, my ears can’t really tell the difference in a blind test between my SSD library of CD's connected to my Lumin streamer or the sound from Tidal and I’m not talking their MQA stuff. I will try Qobuz sometime this year, many have said their catalogue needs to catch up to Tidal’s offerings, and Tidal's offerings suit me just fine.

They offter the same SQ and enoyment. I will buy the CD I think is I like the most. The rest will all rely on Tidal or Qobuz streaming. Saving shelf space and constantly get the new release update. Modern recording quality is much than before. So I can enjoy the HiRes (at least 96khz/24bit). It cost you only $20/month. Well worth it.

streaming services like Qobuz offer three levels of audio quality:

-  MP3 320 KBPS (compressed like Spotify)
-  FLAC 16-BIT / 44.1 KHZ (this is CD quality)
-  FLAC 24-BIT UP TO 192 KHZ (hi-res, better than CD)

I should have qualified streaming not including hi-res files.

Depends on the source on the server.  If the streamed content is of higher resolution than CD "red book" standard, then the quality will be "better".

As any number of threads in these forums about the pros or cons of high resolution will testify, words like "better" or "worse" are more than a little subjective.  Perhaps "different" is more appropriate...

Happy listening.