Do high-end streamers make an audible difference?

[pete_mac]

9 minutes ago, POV said:

 

Asynchronous data transmission isn't theory, it's fact and it's widely used in a whole range of different data transmission applications.  

 

If it interests you there is an easily digestible explanation here: 

 

https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=synchronization-asynchronous-transmission

 

 

Well in this case it would be more accurately described as subjective experience vs fact.  

 

I know - this isn’t my first rodeo. In appreciate the link but I’m very familiar with the subject matter.

 

As I said earlier, theory is great. Have a listen before making up your mind. I did, and I am extremely satisfied. 

[MattyW]

2 hours ago, rantan said:

Just generally, why does anybody think that truth matters to an audiophile?

Wise words.

[a.dent]

I’ve owned USB reclockers, linear power supplies, DDCs, DACs, streamers, transports and multiple other devices that my audionervosa drove me to buy. I could have sworn they all made a noticeable difference to the sound of my system at the time I tried them. 

 

A few years ago I started reading measurement orientated blogs and I started researching the science behind digital sound reproduction.

 

To my surprise, once I understood the science a little better, the SQ differences disappeared.

 

I sold all that superfluous stuff and have now gone back the my old Squeezebox Touch directly feeding my Accuphase DAC. I couldn’t be happier.

 

So I would advise the OP to do the research before committing. Oh and try to do some level of blind testing rather than just listening to your mates saying “that sounds better doesn’t it?"

[muon*]

1 hour ago, a.dent said:

I’ve owned USB reclockers, linear power supplies, DDCs, DACs, streamers, transports and multiple other devices that my audionervosa drove me to buy. I could have sworn they all made a noticeable difference to the sound of my system at the time I tried them. 

 

A few years ago I started reading measurement orientated blogs and I started researching the science behind digital sound reproduction.

 

To my surprise, once I understood the science a little better, the SQ differences disappeared.

 

I sold all that superfluous stuff and have now gone back the my old Squeezebox Touch directly feeding my Accuphase DAC. I couldn’t be happier.

 

So I would advise the OP to do the research before committing. Oh and try to do some level of blind testing rather than just listening to your mates saying “that sounds better doesn’t it?"

So now that you believe these things don't make an audible difference, you can no longer hear an audible difference?

 

I understand this is your experience, and I don't doubt it, I just get curious around belief systems and perception of various individuals.

 

I have not used some of the things you mention (some I have), but I understand that theory and data says things like cables can't make a difference yet I still hear the differences.

Edited January 25 by muon*

[POV]

LOL…yep nothing is real in audiophile world.

[muon*]

6 minutes ago, POV said:

LOL…yep nothing is real in audiophile world.

audiophile /ô′dē-ə-fīl″/

noun

1. A person having an ardent interest in stereo or high-fidelity sound reproduction.

2. A person with an interest in high fidelity sound reproduction and its associated technology.

[frankn]

I think these units do much more than simply reclock the signal, they also provide galvanic isolation, a much cleaner signal & carrier voltage, have much improved grounding and with all that less chance of ground loops. 
Gieseler Audio makes some very nice DACs and Clay says of his regenerator :

What does this do sound wise?

The main difference I hear in my setup is improved imaging & richer smoother vocals but without any loss of detail.  
Now Clay could be designing his DACs badly so you have to purchase his regenerator but I doubt it. 
 

Ted Smith (DirectStream designer and SW/FW engineer) said the following in a discussion about signal and noise incoming to a DAC ;

RFI/EMI are picked up by induction in any loop, the amount of current injected into the loop is proportional to the loop's area and hence big ol' groundloops formed between power cords and interconnects is often the biggest receiver of RFI/EMI. That current can cause noise directly in the power supplies, its frequencies can be aliased down in the audio band by sum and difference frequencies with any clock in the system, etc. You can never completely get rid of jitter, ASRC actually just encoded the incoming jitter into the signal (it changes the signal based on the relative timings of the incoming and outgoing clock.) Anyway power supply (and other) noise induces jitter and jitter induces noise... The best you can do is low pass filter the jitter with reclockers, etc. In practice the noise on the 5V power in the USB cable is the biggest source of noise with USB, tho suppressing the horrible jitter caused by the 8k USB block rate (which doesn't evenly divide 44.1lk ...) is a good thing.

 

So perhaps it is a much cleaner input , (grounds, filtering, great power supplies) with lower phase noise (clock), galvanic isolation rather than the absolute clock accuracy that contribute more to the improvements that people hear.  

[NonPlayableCharacter]

Some posts have been hidden. They were either circular in nature or getting niggly.

 

This thread is now on post approval.

[a.dent]

12 hours ago, muon* said:

So now that you believe these things don't make an audible difference, you can no longer hear an audible difference?

 

I’m saying I now realise I never did hear an audible difference but I believed I did at the time.

 

12 hours ago, muon* said:

 

I understand this is your experience, and I don't doubt it, I just get curious around belief systems and perception of various individuals.

 

Yes. I’m curious about belief systems too. It works both ways.

 

12 hours ago, muon* said:

 

I have not used some of the things you mention (some I have), but I understand that theory and data says things like cables can't make a difference yet I still hear the differences.

 

If you believe you hear a difference then of course you do hear a difference. 

 

@Almaz asked if high end streamers make an audible difference. I would personally say it’s unlikely unless the streamer has been poorly designed and is distorting the signal somehow. Even then, a well designed DAC (which most are nowadays) will be able to correct the problem/s in most cases.

[aussievintage]

22 hours ago, POV said:

Unfortunately, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, people remain conviced

 

That's because  a lack of knowledge about the technology prevents them understanding that they are being shown real evidence.

[aussievintage]

17 hours ago, muon* said:

Yes, sometimes It's theory vs perceived reality.

 

fixed.

[bob_m_54]

13 hours ago, muon* said:

audiophile /ô′dē-ə-fīl″/

noun

1. A person having an ardent interest in stereo or high-fidelity sound reproduction.

2. A person with an interest in high fidelity sound reproduction and its associated technology.

"Yes, sometimes It's theory vs reality."

[NonPlayableCharacter]

1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

 

That's because  a lack of knowledge about the technology prevents them understanding that they are being shown real evidence.

 

Extrapolating this: it's a reasonable observation, and should not be viewed as a a sleight despite being somewhat direct(!).

 

Not forgetting that one's perception is also one's reality when it comes to lived-experience with audiophiles. Expectation bias exists across the spectrum and is not unique to those who believe, for example, that a streamer does make a difference. It also exists in those whose experience and perceptions say it does not make a difference.

 

Whilst not intended to be an appeal to authority, and knowing just how tetchy folk can get about their beliefs, the fact is there is a strong (but not absolute) correlation between individuals with a technical or electrical (occupational or educational) background and a disregard for the belief that this particular backwater encompassing digital audio is as granular and variable as other individuals and their beliefs. This, in and of itself, could be construed as expectation bias.

 

Basically, everyone is right in light of their own nuanced experiences. We are not going to resolve this, so let's stick to exchanging experiences and not attacking or subverting other's lived experiences.

[pete_mac]

1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

 

That's because  a lack of knowledge about the technology prevents them understanding that they are being shown real evidence.

A contrary view… many of us are perfectly well versed on the tech, but do not let it determine what we do and don’t hear. 
 

There is a trend lately where it seems that every subjective opinion is met with a response that infers the poster is not aware of the technical side of things, confirmation bias and other such matters. 

[aussievintage]

13 minutes ago, pete_mac said:

A contrary view… many of us are perfectly well versed on the tech, but do not let it determine what we do and don’t hear. 
 

There is a trend lately where it seems that every subjective opinion is met with a response that infers the poster is not aware of the technical side of things, confirmation bias and other such matters. 

 

That's because we can't imagine how someone can believe something that is contradicted by hard evidence.  If the subjective opinions expressed, were tempered by some acknowledgement of possible expectation bias, then perhaps reality would become more evident.

Edited January 25 by aussievintage

[mloutfie]

There is a lot of discussion regarding hardware. Myself are still perplexed different raspberry pi os and software implementation running the same LMS opensource software sounds different.  This can be a cheap test for anyone can do. 

 

Some of these streamer manufacturer that run their own software do focus on software implementation. Which part of their strengths. Some streamer brand focus on upsampling which is (arguably) better than in dac upsampling.

 

My suggestion to the op whatever you try to get spend time on investigation the manufacturer support of the software. If they don't we'll support it don't touch them.

[pete_mac]

26 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

That's because we can't imagine how someone can believe something that is contradicted by hard evidence.  If the subjective opinions expressed, were tempered by some acknowledgement of possible expectation bias, then perhaps reality would become more evident.

This presumes that the ONLY reason that someone hears a difference is because of expectation bias, and that there cannot possibly be any audible difference unless it is supported by specs/measurements/theory/white papers. 
 

As I said earlier - many of us are well versed on the technical and “human” sides of listening. We are not oblivious to it. We just choose to keep an open mind. 

 

 

[NonPlayableCharacter]

Trying to get back on topic, a brief experiment I tried with the last major change of my system:

 

There is some relevance to the topic, but not absolute adherence to the actual question posed. It is merely what could be considered a parallel road.

 

In my old system, I was running a Lumin T2 streamer/DAC with analogue output to my old McIntosh MA352 integrated amp. Due to hearing actual benefits of Dirac Live Bass Control, I decided to move to an Arcam AV41 pre-amp with Dirac LBC licence and a pair of McIntosh MC830 monoblocks.

 

The Arcam has a dedicated streamer in-build along with dual ESS9026Pro DAC. The Lumin's DAC is technically superior as a dual ESS 9028Pro.

 

During the swap-around, I tried 3 different test configurations to see if I could discern any differences:

1. Using Lumin for streamer and DAC and analogue RCA output into the Arcam.
2. Using Lumin for streamer and digital BNC output to RCA input on the Arcam to use the Arcam's DAC.
3. Using purely the Arcam internal streamer and DAC.

Source was Roon playing both local files (16/44.1) and streamed Qobuz (up to 24/192) in all cases, all cabling in place to enable me to change the Arcam's source to flick between each of the 3 input configurations. I did need to do some manual level-matching from UMIK measurements taken prior to doing the quick-change tests. I tried with no Dirac enabled as well as with full Dirac LBC filters enabled.

 

Net result is I could not pick a difference. Nothing. No doubt I'll now be told I didn't do a double-blind test, my system is not resolving enough or I don't have a good ear or whatever; save it. This is my lived experience.

 

Outside of the big 3 (changes to the room/treatments, speakers and amplification), the biggest remaining influential factor I have encountered for changes in my perception of sound and subsequent enjoyment in my environment has been my mood and general demeanour on a given day - and by a country mile the single most influential factor outside of the big 3 too.

 

E&OE

[muon*]

Everyone's experience is valid for them.

 

Personally I have never heard the sound change due to my feelings or mood, unless that is the result of mood altering substances.

 

[Almaz]

I now have the Aurender ACS100 connected to my dac via ( the only output option ) a quality, not overly expensive USB cable.

I will do some evaluation over the next couple of days a report back on my findings.  
Thank you for all of the advice.

[Almaz]

I’m sorry but I don’t see why this thread needs to be post approved.

Surely the members are entitled to their opinions, even if they sometimes conflict with others. I don’t think any member deliberately sets out to personally attack others. Sometimes it’s the conflicting opinions which are most valuable. In saying that I would not like this post to be deleted by a moderator. 
You gave an opinion, that in your opinion the sound and subsequent enjoyment in your environment is mood dependent on the day “ I see that is a valid opinion. You didn’t delete that from the postings.

Edited January 26 by Almaz

[aussievintage]

1 hour ago, pete_mac said:

This presumes that the ONLY reason that someone hears a difference is because of expectation bias, and that there cannot possibly be any audible difference unless it is supported by specs/measurements/theory/white papers. 

 

 

err, no it doesn't.  I qualified what I said by intentionally using the term "hard evidence"  as opposed to theory, and dodgy measurements.  Understanding that a DAC is using asynchronous data,  means that reclocking cannot have any effect, because it is just not using the clock.

[bob_m_54]

17 hours ago, muon* said:

I have not used some of the things you mention (some I have), but I understand that theory and data says things like cables can't make a difference yet I still hear the differences.

But scientific electrical principals and measured data does say cables can make a difference. Physical properties of the cable will affect how the signal is transmitted down the cable..

 

But..... This will be most apparent for analog signals. The effect of cables on digital signals will be determined by the ability of the receiving device to handle any signal degradation induced by a cable, without data loss.

 

For power cables, as long as the cable is of a suitable size to handle the required current draw without excessive voltage drop, then it won't affect how the device sounds. This may be audible if using a riculously small cable on a high current device, with a poorly designed power supply.

 

This is off topic to the OP's post, but does illustrate that a technical knowledge of the equipment used, and the principals involved can explain why we hear differences. However, it doesn't and can't explain why we hear differences where none should exist.

[rand129678]

If using a USB source, highly recommend a good low cost USB isolator, like Topping HS02.

 

Leak/ground/RF currents can affect analogue output of DAC if you have things setup in just the right way - these USB isolators block these currents, at least on the DAC USB input.

 

You might provide other pathways for these currents with digital coax for example, although some good DACs or streamers transformer isolate digital coax too

 

I only use the ethernet input on my streaming DAC and with unshielded UTP ethernet cable, you get the same isolation benefits as a USB isolator would provide.

 

Makes for a clean setup, less boxes.

 

[NonPlayableCharacter]

2 hours ago, Almaz said:

I’m sorry but I don’t see why this thread needs to be post approved.

Surely the members are entitled to their opinions, even if they sometimes conflict with others. I don’t think any member deliberately sets out to personally attack others. Sometimes it’s the conflicting opinions which are most valuable. In saying that I would not like this post to be deleted by a moderator. 
You gave an opinion, that in your opinion the sound and subsequent enjoyment in your environment is mood dependent on the day “ I see that is a valid opinion. You didn’t delete that from the postings.

 

Your post could be hidden as it is bordering on public criticism of the way the boards are moderated and the Volunteer moderators themselves. I am happy to gloss-over that on this occasion and give some latitude as I believe you alone, seeking varying and balanced opinions, are entitled to understand the mechanisms at play. Judging by the reports received in relation to posts in this thread, there has been deliberate provocation and the reports are justified; you may not have seen them before being actioned by the mod team.

 

Unless you are on this thread refreshing every few seconds, you, and any non admin/mod, probably have not seen all of the posts from the previous 24hrs because we got on top of them quickly; they breached guidelines in varying ways. You are questioning, only from what you can see, why the thread should not be on post approval. From my vantage point, seeing existing posts, the hidden posts removed by Volunteers and being privy to the yet-to-be-evaluated-posts, I think the mods are well placed to gauge tone, existence of circular and repetitive argument and also elements of negative personal interaction. We avoid redacting parts of posts, we just hide or do not approve any that fall foul of the Spirit of StereoNet and the guidelines.

 

If we moderated on the existence of subjective opinion, there would not be much on these boards to discuss or share. It is a shame that some posters have had sometimes valid argument removed due to other factors to do with their post(s). It has robbed you of gaining a full picture of the valuable knowledge and insight from a broad range of opinion. People can and will be heard if they put together a cogent post that doesn't move to the personal, or seek to rehash the same arguments over-and-over and in doing, does nothing to progress the discussion; it is not for me or the other moderators to apologise on their behalf.

 

Let's move along with the guidelines in mind.