Thanks for your comments. You are right we have very much the same outlook. I guess some indirect evidence for my theory on networking vs streamer is that Red Book CDs, the same resolution files either on local storage or NAS, and streaming sound exactly the same on my system… and my system makes it easy to make direct comparisons. I’ll look forward to hearing the results of your experiments. |
I appreciate you sharing your insights. I too am a long time IT guy, and the last thing I want to do at the end of the day is mess around with my home network which I'm confident is pretty strong. I do however enjoy playing around with my system, learning and trying new things. I'll premise my comments by saying, just because I don't understand something, doesn't mean it's not real. I'm in the same camp as you, in that I feel a quality streamer is most important. While streaming Qobuz, I unplugged the ethernet cable on my Aurender and it continued playing for almost a minute so clearly it's caching. Also, hi-res files that reside on it's internal hard drive, sound no different than when I live stream them. That's enough for me to move on and ignore the networking side of things, at least for now. My recent experience with a new usb cable got me looking into other tweaks for the digital chain.....and down the rabbit hole I went lol. Reclockers, DC blockers, LPS, fiber and coax media converters, everyone claiming to help fix inherent deficiencies in USB. So besides having the potential of higher bandwidth (which most folks don't need), why the heck is USB so prevalent? Does a quality streamer and Dac make this a mute issue? So I'm going to try something odd, I found a great deal on an Aurender UT100 which is a USB to Toslink converter that mounts directly on the back of my N100h. I've got an Audioquest Cinnamon Toslink cable I'll use to connect. Reasons for this experiment:
|
Yes, my system is WiFi router —> by WiFi —> wall wart extender —> Ethernet cable —> EtherRegen —> via Ethernet cable —> Aurender (W20SE). This is embarrassing. I asked my audio guy to let me try one… he brought it over when he was delivering some really expensive piece of audio gear… I just said… yeah, throw in the EtherReg… I mean it cost nothing in comparison with the tax on a component. I had done a lot of research on the EtherRegen and some much more sophisticated devices, in all cases they produced a benefit. So, what did I hear? Well, maybe a small improvement… maybe nothing. But I had just swapped out amps… a BIG difference. My take is this: The quality of the streamer largely determines the quality of the sound. It makes up for all sorts of deficiencies in networking. So if you have a low end streamer, then an EtherRegen can make a big difference… if you have a high end streamer it will make a really small difference. The streamer does the job for you. This is a theory… unsubstantiated by detailed data that I collected (I was a scientist for 10 years). I have been enjoying my system so much for the last year and a half that I have been too lazy to go unplug it… try my streamer without it… then plug it back in. Maybe this will motivate me to try it. Maybe not. I guess I should. There are lots of folks on the forum that have taken one of two ways of achieving great quality of streaming: 1) screw around with the network… high end routers… clockers… etc. and 2) get a high end streamer. As an aside I have been in IT for the last 35 years mostly a Director of IT in global high tech companies… so I am not ignorant on networking. On the other hand… I am retired, I do not want to waste my time playing with networking. My feeling is that get a high end streamer… maybe a EtherRegen… and don’t play around with the network… unless that makes you happy. Personally after 70 - 80 hours of technical stuff for 45 years, I like just plugging something in and hearing incredibly beautiful music.
|
I think we have similar setups: Wifi router > wireless bridge > Aurender. But you have an ethernet regenerator in place before the Aurender? I was assuming that the conversion (regeneration) to wifi would be adequate. I'll also assume you see an improvement if it's in place, can you please elaborate? Thanks...Tim |
Congratulations. Yes, makes liitle sense, but it can make a big difference. My first huge cable difference between transport and DAC some 35 years ago. I was convinced it could not possibly make a difference. It was as if someone took the components out and replaced them with ones twice as good. My jaw dropped. Usually changes are more subtle… but huge differences can occur.
Probably also helpful you knew the sound of your system really well… instead of a new component. That is why it is best to upgrade and break in your components and learn what they sound like before embarking on interconnects and cables. |
calvinandhobbes, have had the same Pangea for years now and just received a DH Labs Mirage USB cable. Didn't really know what to expect with a digital cable upgrade (just ones and zeros and all that). The difference is startling and it does make the Pangea sound harsh. This is between my N100h and a Qutest. Got it on sale for $150 this week. Just wow, don't understand how, but it sounds much better. I think I'm finally starting to understand what real analog sounds like. |
+1 to what @ghdprentice said. Cables can sound different and better as you spend more, but only if your components can produce a commensurate level of resolution in sound quality. I would stick with the Belkin Gold for now, but this was my experience in trying some different USB cables at different price points.as you upgrade your other components. Belkin Gold was fine. It doesn't do anything noticeable wrong Pangea Premier SE: More resolution than the Belkin Gold but also more harshness to its sound. I didn't love how this sounded and would prefer the Belkin Gold. Shunyata Venom: This would be where I would go to step up from the Belkin Gold as it provided even better resolution than the Pangea cord with more finesse and less harshness..
Phasure Lush 1: This is where I've ended up. Compared to the Shunyata Venom, it provided more roundness & presence than the Shunyata cable with more realistic tonal quality and detail. All of this comes with the most non-fatiguing sound compared to the other USB cables I've evaluated.
|
I would not worry about it, Belkin is good. Cables and interconnects become more important as the sensitivity of your system gets very high. For the foreseeable future I would concentrate on components. Speaker wire would be the first connection to work on when your speakers are over $1 - 2K. Then once your average component cost is over $1-2K start working on interconnects. In the beginning component performance is key… as well as system setup, and room acoustics. Then, as the sensitivity of your system increases interconnects start to make a difference, and then power cords. |
I, too, would recommend an inexpensive USB cable. I’ve had fine results with Belkin Gold. As to the Schiit cable, IMO a manufacturer would not sell cables that would work poorly with their electronics. I tried switching from Belkin to a more expensive Audioquest cable and couldn’t hear any difference. I have tried several other mid-priced USB cables and never could hear them doing anything different from the inexpensive ones. Not with a recent DAC with good USB connectivity, anyway. The only time I heard digital or USB cables make a difference was when I bought my first DAC in about 1992. Seems to me the interfaces have improved and become far less sensitive to cabling in the intervening 30 years. |
When I had the first generation Schiiit Bifrost I was at Belkin and Pangea. I moved up a bit to the Audioquest Forrest and Cinnamon. I had a very noticeable improvement. Might I suggest Amazon and their liberal return policy. You could try a few and return the ones you don’t like. Also a very short cord will reduce the cost. Happy Hunting, Mike B. |
