Why do streamers sound different?

[caesar]

Why do streamers sound different when using the same DAC?

 

[Blizzard]

Why do streamers sound different when using the same DAC?

How are you connecting the streamer to the DAC?

 

[caesar]

How are you connecting the streamer to the DAC?

I'm not there yet. Option 1 is to get a Synology drive --> streamer --> DAC. Option 2 is to get a streamer with a hard drive --> DAC (and backup onto synology drive so I wouldn't lose my files).

 

[Blizzard]

I'm not there yet. Option 1 is to get a Synology drive --> streamer --> DAC. Option 2 is to get a streamer with a hard drive --> DAC (and backup onto synology drive so I wouldn't lose my files).

Have you considered a DAC with built in Ethernet renderer so you don't need the streamer? Besides cost savings, there's huge sonic advantages to having the renderer built right into the DAC.

 

[caesar]

Have you considered a DAC with built in Ethernet renderer so you don't need the streamer? Besides cost savings, there's huge sonic advantages to having the renderer built right into the DAC.

Thanks. Do you have any specific suggestions?

Also, sorry for my naive understanding of computer audio, but I'm not sure what you mean by "renderer". Are you suggesting a Naim or a Lumin type box, where you can plug in your ethernet connection into the same box that houses the DAC?

And also, do you have any thoughts on why they all sound different, per my thread title?

 

[Blizzard]

Thanks. Do you have any specific suggestions?

Also, sorry for my naive understanding of computer audio, but I'm not sure what you mean by "renderer". Are you suggesting a Naim or a Lumin type box, where you can plug in your ethernet connection into the same box that houses the DAC?

And also, do you have any thoughts on why they all sound different, per my thread title?

If you can let me know the price range your looking to spend for streamer/DAC combined I can offer suggestions. By "renderer", it means that the "streamer" is built right into the DAC, rather than being in a separate box. The reason it's a better way to do things is because the "streamer" board connects direct into the DAC board using a much higher quality protocol designed for internal connections only. It can also be clocked to the same master clock for much lower jitter. Lumin and Naim are indeed examples of DAC's with built in renderers. The new Hegel HD 30 is an example of a brand new cutting edge DAC with built in renderer that just hit the market:

http://www.hegel.com/products/dac/hd30

So this ties right into why different streamers sound different. Depending on how you connect the streamer to the DAC, the quality of the implementation of the output on the streamer's vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. When the streamer is built into the DAC, it's one less variable to worry about to cause jitter and noise. It also saves on the extra cable.

The recent streamer fad we have had over the last couple years if going to start dying. This is because more and more DAC manufacturer's are starting to use the superior method of building them in.

 

[asiufy]

There are indeed benefits to be had by having the streamer/renderer built inside the DAC. MSB has an optional renderer module for their DACs. Linn also makes DACs/preamps/streamers, and some will even include a power amp, all in one box. Hegel makes excellent integrated amps with DACs and streamers as well, specially the new H360, a winner by all accounts.

Now, to answer your original question, my take is that a streamer is just another transport, like a computer, or a CD drive/transport. They sounded different, didn't they? Computers specially...

The Aurender sounds *very* different from the Auralics, who in turn sound different from the Linn. A streamer is yet another piece of the audio puzzle that must be factored in

 

[caesar]

If you can let me know the price range your looking to spend for streamer/DAC combined I can offer suggestions. By "renderer", it means that the "streamer" is built right into the DAC, rather than being in a separate box. The reason it's a better way to do things is because the "streamer" board connects direct into the DAC board using a much higher quality protocol designed for internal connections only. It can also be clocked to the same master clock for much lower jitter. Lumin and Naim are indeed examples of DAC's with built in renderers. The new Hegel HD 30 is an example of a brand new cutting edge DAC with built in renderer that just hit the market:

http://www.hegel.com/products/dac/hd30

So this ties right into why different streamers sound different. Depending on how you connect the streamer to the DAC, the quality of the implementation of the output on the streamer's vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. When the streamer is built into the DAC, it's one less variable to worry about to cause jitter and noise. It also saves on the extra cable.

The recent streamer fad we have had over the last couple years if going to start dying. This is because more and more DAC manufacturer's are starting to use the superior method of building them in.

Thanks. $15 +/- $5K.

But shouldn't the DAC - assuming it's a good one - be able to piece together the signal coming from the streamer box and greatly reduce the jitter?

 

[caesar]

But shouldn't the DAC - assuming it's a good one - be able to piece together the signal coming from the streamer box and greatly reduce the jitter?

Wouldn't this hold true even more, especially, it seems like a smart business strategy for companies like MSB, Naim, etc., is to get the consumer into constant the upgrade path?

 

[Blizzard]

Thanks. $15 +/- $5K.

But shouldn't the DAC - assuming it's a good one - be able to piece together the signal coming from the streamer box and greatly reduce the jitter?

They can somewhat. But not near as good as if it's built in, clocked to the same master, and connected via CMOS I2S/DSD over short PCB traces.

If your looking to spend that kinda money you might wanna check out the Merging NADAC. It uses the ultimate renderer technology. Ravenna. However it is designed to use a PC as the server. But the PC can be located in an office, and the media player GUI can be controlled via mobile app. You also have many more choices of media players to choose from. Most other DAC's with internal renderers, uses DLNA UPNP. So you can connect direct to a NAS, but your limited to UPNP GUI's, as well as not being able to use PC based upsampling software etc. But still very low jitter, better than external streamer.

 

[Blizzard]

Wouldn't this hold true even more, especially, it seems like a smart business strategy for companies like MSB, Naim, etc., is to get the consumer into constant the upgrade path?

No matter how good an external transport is, it will never be as good as an internal. For the reasons mentioned in my last post. The very best way to interface to an external streamer, is via I2S/LVDS. But not too many streamers offer that option. The Sonore Signature Rendu is an example of one that does. But if your starting fresh, just go with an all in 1.

I'm actually building my own all in 1 with Ravenna interface, and amps. But looking like it won't be ready for a few months.