why expensive streamers

@8th-note

I simply would not expect the streamed file to sound better than the CD played through the same DAC. If it did then I would question the quality of my CD gear. If my PC is somehow adding noise or corrupting the file then I can’t hear it. I don’t understand how a multi-thousand dollar streamer is going to sound better than a CD played through a Jay’s Audio CD3 Mk III.

You certainly do not need a multi-thousand-dollar music server/streamer that uses a lot of costly parts (and markup) to eliminate noise from getting to the DAC. A simple test would be to use a Sonore OpticalRendu streamer (used for about $700) with fibre coming out of a $100 (or less) network switch. Input the fibre to the Rendu and then USB into your DAC from the Rendu. Compare that to the PC going direct to your DAC via USB. If you cannot hear a difference, then you are set. I hear a huge difference.

Another factor is the ambient noise of a computer near an audio system. I have a computer in my office that is next to my office system. That PC is a SIlentPC and cost $6k to make it silent, but I do not put my ROON Core on it. I could but I want a PC that I have running for most of the day for my ROON Core.

For that I have a very internally noisy $500 computer nowhere near my audio systems (under a bed in the guest room). My systems are in the Livingroom and office. I use the "low-cost" OpticalRendu to stream. The Rendu’s use fibre optic cable just before the DAC. That is import because fibre is made of GLASS and cannot carry the analog noise in the computer network (or USB into the DAC (for the most part)). The same noise that you can spend a fortune to eliminate with a dedicated music server.

BTW - the chances of CD sounding worse than a streamer are rather low. CD has a big advantage in delivering the bits and could sound better. Spending a fortune also on a Transport seems questionable to me when buffering should render the need for a Transport less important. That Aurelic S1 non-fibre streamer ($1999) with buffering CD playback seems like a killer feature.

@invalid - if it were not same bits, you would not be able to read attached PDFs :-)

Apples and oranges. Transmission without error correction and DA conversion and pure digital networks that are designed to transmit exact bits over many servers, switches, cable types, optical/electrical, under oceans and in space in chunks, out of order, with recovery if anything is lost.

We don't want that Tomahawk to miss, do we :-)

@mikhailark that is a great description of what is going on with the difference between digital and analog transfer.

In terms of noise in bits, assuming that source file has no noise, my understanding is that the only way transferred (not digital processed) bits can obtain "noise" is if they flip value during transmission due to things like line noise or jitter. If this occurs redundant (resending of the packet of audio bits) takes care of it and we have our original no noise source file.

@wlutke and others. Sorry for the tenor of my original post, I didn't mean to dig at peoples views. I really want to know why streamers can affect sound, given what seems like easy ways to protect the integrity of bits. I am hoping someone with technical knowledge can step in and explain how streams affect sound.

@invalid can you add the actual means that bit transfer is not perfect? I would like to know.

I can understand the skepticism when addressing streamers and streaming technology. I, too, was wary of what differences would be obtained by moving to a more costly route.

I made a change to my digital system when I finally got a Memory Player. I was not expecting a major change, but it was immediately apparent that it did improve the sound reproduction.

Not that everyone should plunk down a considerable amount of money on their digital system, I think it wise that they should know that enhancing the digital signal will improve what they end up hearing. This is new technology. Be preparer to be open minded.

B