I'm considering upgrading a generic 5 meter USB from pc to DAC. Opinions please on DH Labs Mirage vs Transparent Audio. Has anyone had an opportunity to compare in a quality system?
@tvrgeekI’m surprised of the mediocre results you get from Fosi V3...
I know someone who drives Magnepans with it, another guy who drives Martin Logans, and they are both very happy with the performance.
I never heard the V3 (not yet) but I bought an Aiyima A07 for a friend, and that tiny thing fills a big room with loud, undistorted, detailed sound and very impressive bass driving a pair of Magnat All Ribbon speakers. Fosi V3 is supposed to be better than Aiyima A07...
I’m waiting on a 33.00 USB cable. All the customer reviews are excellent as far as that goes. It’s a test to see if this cable will make any difference from the current 2.00 USB.
I kinda wonder about people who post on a site called Audiogon where you can buy a system comprised of used audio equipment that costs as much as a small condominium, but who cannot tell empirically that one wire design sounds different than another. I mean for me it is not even subtle. And based on my limited work building cables (and measuring them to make sure they at least won’t start a fire in high voltage and current applications), I find measurements are of limited use in telling me how they will sound in real life application in my system and in my room/operating environment. Kimber provides measurements for all the wires they sell, and I applaud their willingness to do that. But those measurements don’t tell you exactly how those wires, be they digital, analog, or power, will actually sound when placed in your system.
The audio world is full of consumers with engineering backgrounds who refuse to believe that wires can make a difference if the boxes they connect follow sound engineering principles and “measure well”. And then they hear the difference wires can make for themselves and it’s like they just found out the Book of Genesis was only an ancient writer’s best guess at how the universe and our world were formed based on the general understanding at the time. I know, it’s unsettling to have your dogma and intellectual foundation unmoored by empirical evidence. But God gave us two ears, one brain and one mouth. In audio as in life, it is best to use them in proportion.
@tvrgeekI think you need to take some Xanax. Clocking absolutely is still an issue. I also made full disclosure on the dates of the information I compiled, oh and was not compiled for you you arrogant azz. You must need a ladder to get on that high horse. You sure make it hard for people to respect you or even want to read your opinions on anything. Truly sad your ego gets' in the way of what should be enjoyable.
Yet in other publications (2016) they find the articles I sited as relevant.
Also USB Protocols were written in the 1990’s, so really little has changed in the protocols. Changes have been in clocking and hardware, no?
Regardless I think the credentials and experience of the authors EDN outweigh you alleged expertise. JUNE 27, 2012
BY HENK MULLER, PRINCIPAL TECHNOLOGIST XMOS LTD.
As a longtime audio DIYer I can sympathize with audio enthusiasts who don’t wish to have their fun spoiled by the likes of such objectivist methods as hardcore engineering measurements and double blind testing (DBT). But audio subjectivists should realize that ignoring the objectivist “reality” side of audio means never being able to determine an objective “better” or “best” and forever drifting from one product to another in search of the “holy grail.”
Me, I’d rather spend my time enjoying listening to music.
@cleedsNot sure if that’s a word, but I like it!!! Fitting that it contains the word “mental” in it and also makes it sound like the cult that it really is — killing two birds. Hey, “ain’t” wasn’t initially in the dictionary either until it became part of our vernacular, and I plan to do my part to eventually get your word in there too!
I suggest some believers in magic here do a little reading on human objectivity ...
Perhaps you should take your own advice, because you seem to be one of the greatest believers in magic on all of A’gon. You find it here and there and yonder, fortified with pixie dust and measurementalism and seasoned with snake oil. It has the ability to remap your brain, the way you tell it.
I suggest some believers in magic here do a little reading on human objectivity, or lack there-of. More productive than snide insulting remarks. Human senses are not and never have been objective. This is why first person witness is the lowest form of legal evidence. We hear and see what we want to see.
Look at dates of publications. USB mode ONE is not Mode TWO. DAC's from 2013 are not the same as even the cheapest today. Much has been learned, much has been applied. Clocking WAS a problem as it was host based. It is not now. NOPE, GONE. Noise injected by ground, shield or 5V can now be totally eliminated. Cheap.
I do not sell either cheap or expensive cables. I am not trying to defend my ego for being scammed. I am not a total measurement is all. I do listen. But I also understand how these transfer layers work and only which to help those who do not have the technical background. They don't teach digital communications in medical or business school. Seems they no longer teach logical thinking and arguments either.
Hmmm... tvrgeek adimits he’s never objective, that his brain always lies, and that it has remapped reality. Would a mandatory 72 hour observation period be required?
I try to present facts so people can make up their own mind. If you have any actual evidence other than "You believe", please present it.
You consistently reject all evidence that does not suit your measurementalist’s notion of how things should work. Pretending that you sincerely seek evidence is not likely to fool many here.
Your BRAIN has re-mapped to convince you it is better. Our brain lies. Always. Humans are never objective.
As you acknowledge, it appears that your brain lies and that, indeed, it may have become "remapped." Fortunately, most of the rest of us can still think for ourselves.
Wow someone is up on their soapbox, I asked a question, I am here to learn.
Though the focus is on PC and I will not use a PC in my audio chain as they lack shielding and introduce noise. I like a well built cable as opposed to the cheap crap from Amazon.
Can there be an audible difference with proper implementation. I do think so and this will be more evident in well engineered higher end equipment not the stuff from AMZ or AEX. Not saying anyone is wrong just that your mileage may vary.
Yes I did a little research (alibet very little) and lot's of cutting and pasting. Enjoy there is some really good information here in my opinion and supports some of the posting in this subject.
Now to @tvrgeekpoint these people point out here: EDN (2012).
Here in this article EDN claims that Colcking is the major hurdle for quality audio over USB:
USB is a versatile interface that provides many ways to propagate and control digital audio; however, it is important for the industry to follow a standardized mechanism for transporting audio over USB to secure interoperability, which has been the cornerstone for the adoption of USB. To respond to this fundamental request, the USB organization has developed the Audio Devices Class, which defines a very robust standardized mechanism for transporting audio over USB. The USB audio class specification is available to the public from the USB Implementers Forum (www.usb.org).
One of the major issues with streaming audio over USB is the synchronization of data streams from the host (source) to the device (sink); this has been addressed by developing a robust synchronization scheme on “isochronous transfers,” which has been incorporated into the USB specification.
Now, I can understand not buying the cheapest of USB cables, but I'd do that for reliability, not audio quality.
Don't fool yourself. Paying $695 for a USB cable will not get you better audio. You will get the same audio quality from a $6.95 cable. The audio quality is a function of the original encoding, the decoding, the analog signal processing and amplifier, and the speaker. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Get yourself a top-of-the-line audio analyzer and show me the difference in audio quality between cables that carry digital signals.
Take a look at the linked page above. Be sure to read the comments over there as well, and then tell us what you think.
“…understanding of audio may have passed the current generation of microcontroller suppliers by, resulting in a generally rather poor standard of audio replay. This may be down to a tendency for pure-play MCU companies to treat audio as just another data interface format… Some of the methods proposed and implemented for generating the audio master clock… have no place in a high-quality audio product”
On one thing, however, we do see eye to eye: the article concludes with the advice 'look for a vendor team that clearly knows what it's doing in the audio field.' With that, we couldn't agree more!
If someone is not interested in factual information on this subject, you do not need to read my posts. I try to present facts so people can make up their own mind. If you have any actual evidence other than "You believe", please present it.
I hope a $90 USB cable is well made and works as well as a $6 one that is made to spec. If you feel better using it and can afford it, fine. Just understand it does not actually perform any better.
USB is the defacto-standard. Anyone who wants to be in the marketplace needs to follow the market trends. It is not the best transport, but it is what we have.
PCM, coax or fiber, relies on the HOST to providing clocking information. Notoriously poor. USB uses the DAC or STREAMER internal clock. It can be as good as the designer wants. For $100 it can be excellent.
Some new higher end DACs also buffer and re-clock the PCM, so it would them be just as good as the USB Mode 2.
Stupid engineers? Yes, if they do not design their interface to deal with the realistic world. An AMD galvanic isolator is a 50 cent chip, yet why don't $5000 DACs include one? Incompetence!
I will say ONE MORE TIME, I measured the noise injected into the analog output using "free-be" cables which cut open were very poorly shielded. I measured none with well made to spec. I measured none using a $12 external galvanic isolator.
Just trying to provide factual information. Not everyone has a technical background so they may be more susceptible to snake-oil or may more easily fall into placebo conclusions. A little knowledge helps.
So let me get this straight, you have a DAC and a Streamer-Server that only has USB that is bad? That using a USB cable from a company like DH Labs is foolish even though the cable is not that expensive. That the DAC and the Streamer builder are not using 5v protocols, it is still bad even though the DAC and Streamer engineers built their respective devices around these protocols. Please explain this to me @tvrgeekI must be stupid. As must these engineers at all these companies.
Forgot to add. USB 1 and 2 are not "guaranteed" transports like TCP/IP is. More like UDP/IP. It is up to the application layer which I do not believe is either for audio. But as I have shown, it is quite reliable. That does mean a poorly implemented receiver can in fact make a mistake not caught and if horribly enough of them, maybe audible. It would likely need to be by coincidence MSB or close to it.
I know this won't close the USB debate by "true believers" Fine, there are plenty of sources that will take your Money for Nothing :)
Did a deeper dive. ( getting used to my new DAC, so lots of time)
First, related is PCM. Source and end 75 Ohms, so a 75 Ohm coax is the "correct" cable. Length should not matter until it is so long as signal loss comes to play. No issue with jitter caused by reflections but you are dependent on the source clock. "S" and "P" knew what they were doing.
OK, USB. First of all, it is NRZ encoding. Shape of the rise and fall is irrelevant. It's a 90 Ohm specified cable, twisted pair. Shielding was not part of the spec for USB 1 and 2 as it was designed for keyboards or printers. So only needed to have reasonable CMR. Now we use this for audio between devices with different power and ground paths. That's our world. The end point ( DAC) design needs to recognize this. Both for loss and for reflections, there is a distance limitation of 5M. There is no specification for minimum length. ( Thumb drives work just fine @ 0) A "0" is +/- .01V and a "1" is 3.6 to 4.5 V. As you can see almost the full 4V hysteresis so it would take a HUGE amount of noise or reflection to be detected and with matched impedance, that is not happening.
I again stand by my "decent cable and well designed input" as all that is required for USB audio. USB mode 2. Going past that requires "extra ordinary claims". Not saying they are not valid, but the require proof as the technology says it just ain't happening.
I noticed a You-Tube video where our friend at PS was talking about USB jitter in relation to the source clock. That was ONLY USB mode 1. We don't do that any more! The DAC buffers and re-clocks.
PS: USB-3 is even more robust including transport layer CRC, but we are not there yet.
My main system is my own speakers, Seas / SB based, with a Peerless low Q sub. O-Audio plate. DSpeaker Cinema DSP on it for the room nodes. Vidar main amplifier, Today Topping DX3pro+ DAC, but I have 5 and a new one coming today. PC based server, JRiver FLAC files. EQ for the mains is a Schiit Lokius. It blocks the deep bass from the mains and rolls off the top just a little as my room is a bit bright. Not using any DSP eq to the mains.
My desktop is my own speakers, Dayton/Vifa XT-25 based, Sub etc. Using my desktop JRiver, JDS Atom+ dac and amp feeding a Schiit Rekkr.
I spend a lot of time reading in my guest/HT. JRiver on the PC, Anthem AVR and again, all my own speakers.
My workshop downstairs is leftovers. ELAC speakers, Fosi V3 amp and an old Kenwood tuner. Enough to play the "Classical Station" in the background. I had a Creek on it, but that was a shame to waste such an amp, so I sold it in favor of the Chi-Fi wonder. Upstairs I stream to a laptop and feed an antique SMSL Tripath amp to whatever set of old speakers at the time.
@tvrgeekI am sorry I had to look all that stuff up as it is not traditional audiophile or even mid fi gear. Now back to my original question you never answered. What is in your audiophile setup, what is the audio equipment you currently use for listening for pleasure, not test equipment.
@tvrgeekSaid "Between good cables, no I heard no difference. I am not positive I heard a difference with the bad cables." Thanks for answering the question.
I have heard big differences and no differences between cables in different applications. I noted above in this thread that my favorite USB cable is currently made by DH Labs, but I have also done sound testing with cheap cables (all under $12) connecting a hard drive to a server, and I had a very specific favorite (my favorite was actually a "Belkin" not a "Belden"). That is when I first realized digital cables matter. I assemble a lot of my own power cables, and completed cables I thought would sound killer based on design, materials and measurements just sound weird, and some cheap power cables from China sound fantastic to me. Go figure.
On other digital cables - specifically coax cables - a vendor handed me some cables from brands I had no experience with to try, and then I went out and borrowed a bunch more from another vendor and I did a set of subjective sound tests. Turns out I had particular dislikes, likes and likes more. I had my son who has good ears for recorded music come sit down and listen to different cables and take notes as I swapped them out calling them 1, 2, 3 etc. He could not see what I was doing. A blind test. No particular order by price. His notes generally echoed my non-blind impressions. He hands down liked the two most expensive cables the best without knowing what they were. He also really liked a cable that was the 2nd cheapest cable tested. He did not like the cable I had been using and I thought previously was all that. Turns out after going through the testing period, I didn't care for that much either when compared to other wires in the test. Maybe he was tired, or confused, or the result was a fluke, or maybe he just has really good ears and could detect differences in sound attributable to nothing more than some wires and shielding and connectors running between a server and a DAC. I bought an expensive cable as a result of this experience. Maybe my gear sucks and needs that extra help. Dunno. But it makes me happy when I listen. YMMV.
Between good cables, no I heard no difference. I am not positive I heard a difference with the bad cables. Knowing they are bad etc. I had my Grado's then which were more revealing than my Yamahas. If it measures bad and measures good is cheap, why not?
There is actually no such thing as a true blind test because you know it is a test. Your brain will make up answers. So, we get larger groups trying to take guess averages out, double blind and all that. Guess what? When there is no difference, we get answers that are positive they heard a difference, and when a difference, sometimes large, some claim there is none. Do enough trials to where statics start to matter and fatigue sets in and your brain makes up even more stories. Some studies may be as close as 60% and claim that is proof. If you know stats, you know far that is off! That is the problem with subjective tests. They are only valid for you and may or may not reflect reality. Your perception is all that matters though. Being human.
When we make a change, we usually jump in and do "critical listening" and hear details we had not before. Were they really revealed, or were you just listening to music before and not noticed them? I know I have fallen for this. The more your invested in the change, the more likely you can switch back and those details get blocked. Sometimes we put something and because it first seems different, maybe yes, maybe no, but a week later we claim it is "burned in" . More likely, we have just reprogramed our expectations and there was no change. Speakers, yea I buy that. We are a funny species.
It is the complex environment of what you speak. This is why USB and Ethernet cables are twisted pairs and shielded. The designers knew this. Partly for the spec of 11 feet. USB was not intended to exist in a vacuum.
Yes, I blame shortcomings on the end points not implementing good practice. In a $100 DAC, it is cost driven so some slack is given. But in a $500? Nope. $5,000? Pure incompetence.
I did loopback tests between free cables and correctly designed USB cables. Big difference and it shows up in a spectrum analyzer. Added an isolator, and presto, no problem. Two piles, good and bad. You can add a braided sheath and a fancy box, but it won't transfer bits any better.
Remember, it is not the digital waveform that matters. It is how it is detected, PE, NRZ, windowed, etc and then gated into a shift register to be accessed by the DSP section. Even DSD is re-generated. No place for magical properties to hide.
FWIW, I just ordered a D400es and it does NOT have a galvanic isolator. Bad design for that price point considering how much they spent on the cabinet. I will test both with an analyzer and my ears if ones needed in my cabinet. I pay attention to cable dress and common power so It probably is not. I have dead silence through my speakers with no active signal.
@tvrgeekinteresting discussion of how the USB interface could become noisy and why. Seems from your discussion that you lay more blame for any differences in performance on deficiencies in equipment design rather than the cables. I am wondering if you've done any listening tests yourself to see if you hear a difference in different USB cables in application with different gear and in different settings/electrical environments? Have you, for example, done listening tests comparing a "premium" USB cable with an off the shelf Belden and/or generic Chinese USB cable in different settings? If so, what did you learn?
It seems to me that you focused most of your discussion on the relationship between digital cables and the immediate gear they connect. But things can get very complicated in actual user set ups, often with multiple pieces of gear and their cabling creating multiple electrical fields in the neighborhood of your computer/streamer and DAC, not to mention all the other electronic devices operating in your vicinity. This along with variables like the different physical proximity of devices to one another and differing levels of power conditioning and noise suppression in different set-ups would seem to make empirical testing of different cables in different applications a must.
Your mileage in terms of performance and what helps or degrades performance of digital front ends in the context of cabling may in fact really vary, and it may be in part dependent on factors that are beyond the relationship or designs of the sending and receiving devices in a single USB connection.
Well I have not confirmed anything, I just posted some data that seems to support what I am saying. You were making a definite claim that streaming is lossy (and thus UDP), such as watching a live sporting event on streaming video.
I used to think that way too for music but I have started to think that streaming music (at least Qobuz and Tidal level) are TCP based, and thus guarantied delivery.
@carlsbad2 Current high end streaming is supposed to be TCP from discussion on A’gon. I have no time to Google this to show proof. In the past I believe music streaming was UDP.
I have ChatGPT open and asked it the question.
Music streaming services typically use a combination of protocols for delivering audio content to users, and TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) is one of them. However, it’s important to understand that the architecture of music streaming services can involve multiple layers of communication, and TCP may not be the only protocol in use. Here’s how it generally works:
HTTP(S) for Control and Metadata: Music streaming services often use HTTP or HTTPS (secure HTTP) for transmitting control commands, metadata (track information, album art, etc.), and user interactions. These protocols are based on TCP.
Media Streaming Protocols for Audio: The actual audio content is usually streamed using specialized protocols designed for efficient media delivery. While TCP can be used for this purpose, some music streaming services may use UDP (User Datagram Protocol) instead. UDP is preferred for real-time multimedia applications because it provides lower latency and faster data transfer, which is crucial for a smooth audio playback experience.
HTTP Live Streaming (HLS): HLS is a popular streaming protocol used by services like Apple Music. It segments audio files into small chunks and serves them over HTTP(S).
Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH): DASH is another HTTP-based streaming protocol used by some music services. Like HLS, it segments content into chunks and adapts the quality based on network conditions.
UDP-Based Protocols: Some music streaming services use UDP-based protocols for live streaming, which can provide even lower latency than HTTP-based protocols. These may include RTP (Real-Time Transport Protocol) and WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communication).
In summary, music streaming services use a combination of TCP, HTTP(S), and potentially UDP-based protocols for delivering audio content. While control and metadata often rely on TCP, the actual audio streaming may use protocols designed for efficient real-time multimedia delivery, which can include both TCP and UDP, depending on the service and its specific requirements. The choice of protocol may also depend on factors like network conditions, device capabilities, and the streaming service’s architecture.
A really crappy, like the free ones can, and I have measured them, introduce measurable noise in a system. Audible or not is subjective. BUT, a well designed client USB receiver is immune to that kind of problem. If you are running USB mode 1 then varying cable parameters in off-spec crap cables may cause jitter issues as you are using the source clock. Run USB mode 2 asynchronous, and no more problem. Data is buffered and ALL timing is in the client side.
A lot of even expensive boutique DACs have crap USB receivers, so a "correct to spec" USB cable may well improve the sound. Band-aid for an old client. Boutique companies do not always have the time and budget to stay up on fast moving technology. Some of the USB issues were not well understood 10 years ago.
A USB-1 spec cable should be more than enough bandwidth for audio, but most cables meet at least level 2 spec. If USB-c on BOTH ends, it will need to meet the level 3 spec for reliable data rate. Look them up. A to C who knows.
If you have a DAC without galvanic isolation and you believe some garbage is getting in, you can get a perfectly good AMD Galvanic isolator board from Amazon or E-bay for $12. You can get the same transformer in a boutique box for $400 and every price in between. No ground loops. No source ground or power noise injected into the client.
An exception is if the client is powered from the host USB. In some cables the 5 and gd are not shielded so noise pickup is possible but probably trivial compared to the crap a PC puts on the line. Isolators are designed so you can inject high quality power on the client side. Again problem solved with science. I do not know all cables, but Belden stock is two pairs shielded with an overall. Monoprice may not be. China Inc? Your guess is as good as mine.
The USB interface is well defined and respectable companies like Belden make cable certified to the spec. I keep mentioning them because I know them. That does not exclude the hundreds of other raw cable manufacturers. No magic needed.
Using asynchronous mode, It can't effect timing, resolution, space, air, attack, presence, blackness, or any of the "your system is not resolving enough" excuses. Against the laws of physics.
You can pick up and inject noise over the 5th connection. The outer shield. Again, a well designed receiver will reject this, but so will a 49 cent ferrite on the cable.
There is a maximum spec on USB cable length but not a minimum. Some have suggested ring-back on a short cable can cause jitter of the bits. The physics are correct and you can measure this, but it has not been shown that a correctly designed receiver has any issue with bit to bit accuracy into the buffer.
So, to "deniers" there are situations where it can or could have caused a problem. To "believers" you may be hearing the difference between crap and correct, may be hearing a band-aid for a different problem, or may be hearing because your brain said if you spend more it has to be better. Whatever makes you happy. If that multi-color braid over Chinese bulk cable for $400 makes you happy, go for it. Maybe they were nice enough to use 8723 as their stock so you do get a good cable.
FWIW, a steamer is just a smaller PC with fewer applications running. Maybe it has a cleaner power supply, and maybe a cleaner USB port. If you are using the PCM ports, then better hope it has a much better clock, but I notice the newer DACS are also buffering and relocking PCM so even that becomes moot. Or is that mute :) Go streamer because you want the user interface which is configured for media. Not for magic. I use a PC because I am old and don't have a phone attached. I also like being able to adjust the OS and player parameters where in a streamer, they make it easier by doing that for you. Hopefully the best choices. Some of these parameters can make a big sonic difference. Bits are bits but what you do with them matters.
Summary. Using USB mode 2, it's nothing but a transport to move bits from one memory buffer to another. There are ways to mess that up. Engineering helps. magic and money don't. The spec is reliable.
Let me start with a disclaimer: my system is modest in comparison to those of others who have responded to this question. A move to a smaller home 10 years ago forced me from my multi-component tube based Counterpoint system, fully upgraded by Mike Eliot, to the single box solution offered by Devialet. Since then, I have been using the DAC built into the Devialet.
RE: recommendation that you consider going to a dedicated streamer: I streamed digital files through computers for 15 years. I built each of my music server computers - all small form desktops, operating from a position on the stereo stand, that I controlled using a remote keyboard. I payed careful attention to power supplies (always linear), removal of all extraneous OS features and background functions, etc. I believed, undoubtedly mistakenly as there always is work to be done in the garden, I was as close to an optimal dedicated streamer as one could get, at the time I built each of them. A couple years ago, for reasons unrelated to sound quality and system performance, I replaced the computer with an Aurender N200. In my system and to my ear, the Aurender was an upgrade well worth its price.
RE: cables. I’ve owned and enjoyed several sets of Transparent analog ICs, but I can’t speak to the performance of their digital cables. I’m a long-standing fan of DHLabs, who offer, I think, tremendous bang for the buck. So, when I decided to upgrade my usb cable, theirs was the obvious first step. In my system and to my ear, compared to the Pangea it replaced, the cable significantly tightened the bass presentation and sound stage, and improved tonal qualities at the top.
One final note. I agree with the recommendation that you try to shorten the length of your USB cable. About 40 years ago, I read a review of Von Gaylord chinchilla ICs published in International Audio Review by Peter Moncrieff. In the course of his review, Moncrieff observed that the 2m cables sounded better than the shorter or longer lengths. Now, at the time and from anyone else, I would’ve dismissed such a suggestion as nonsensical. But, I had had quite a bit of experience with Moncrieff by then and had come to respect even his most unlikely observations, of which there were many. So, a couple of friends of mine and I contacted Von Gaylord and asked that they send lengths of their chinchilla cable ranging from 1-3.5 meters. After extensive listening, we came to the same conclusion as had Moncrieff. Still today, all my analog and SPDIF cables are 2m. So, when I decided to experiment with usb, I naturally started with several lengths to compare. In my system and to my ear, the 1m DHLabs usb sounds better than the 1.5m and 2m.
Good luck with your project and have fun with the process.
I honestly do not know, you can start a new thread and conduct a poll. Million dollar or inexpensive music streamer/server…they all have a processor at heart. The premise here is, a general purpose PC is not optimized or optimal for audio streaming. You can add fiber or filters as alluded by @antigrunge2 ahead of a DAC to reduce noise but a general purpose PC will never sound as good as dedicated streamer designed specifically to stream audio. Fortunately, there are plenty of decent choices out there at all price points.
What is a computer or streamer doing? It gets the bits from one end to the other. If it is using a guaranteed network delivery protocol, then we are not losing bits.
So, all streamers should sound the same, no they do not. The streamer device connected to the DAC does add some sonic flavor to the sound. However, my argument is that the optimization of a computer for streaming is doing a couple of things. It is lowering the noisy internals found in a computer and it is adding some flavor to this clean sound.
In my case, I say spending on an optimized streamer to reduce noise is an expensive way to this. A simple fibre optic cable just before the DAC (which is all that matters) will also kill the noise. A simple test with Ethernet vs Fibre on most DACs will show the difference. Now adding an expensive streamer after the Ethernet input and then output AES, USB, et al into the DAC should be as clean as the fibre I advocate for.
You spend much more money to do this but gain some convenience. That convenience will be very important for most, but I am very comfortable with this type of things.
I recently had 3 streamers that got the stream from a cheap DELL computer (placed in another room) that I compared side by side and they sounded different. This is the cream of the crop streamers:
Sonore OpticalRendu
Lumin X1 (sold it)
PlayBack Designs Streamer-IF
The sound was great on all. The Lumin was louder, the Sonore was quieter, and the PBD was shocking to me. I have not been able to use the PBD with fibre yet because I do not have the PlayBack Designs Dream DAC yet.
I have been using the PDB with a Benchmark DAC3B via SPDIF input. That also sounds great. What I think is happening is that there must be some fibre inside the PBD streamer. The guy who makes the PDB is considered a digital genius. Using fibre would be a genius move.
PDB designs has now come out with a very expensive streamer. Let’s assume I am mega rich and can afford it. I would not buy it over the demo $2K Streamer-IF I now own,
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
