Do high-end streamers make an audible difference?

[NonPlayableCharacter]

2 hours ago, aussievintage said:

 

 

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.

 

Yep - I think the point has been made a couple of times and we're about to run aground on circular argument and stubborn entrenchment both ways. Let's move along on this one, OP has the info and can assimilate and cogitate accordingly.

 

Thanks.

[a.dent]

1 hour ago, El Tel said:

 

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.

@El Tel Tel, the OP, @Almaz, has a low post count so may be a newish member who has not come across one of these derailed threads that has turned toxic/nasty.

 

You and the other mods do a great job. Thanks.

[NonPlayableCharacter]

26 minutes ago, a.dent said:

@El Tel Tel, the OP, @Almaz, has a low post count so may be a newish member who has not come across one of these derailed threads that has turned toxic/nasty.

 

You and the other mods do a great job. Thanks.

 

I appreciate your sentiment. It is not easy to please all of the people all of the time. Thank you.

 

I am sure with the baptism of fire in this thread, @Almazwill come up to speed quickly. That's partly why I explained the decision process.

[Guest]

My own experience (which requires no criticism nor comment) is that "streamers" make a difference. High-end infers price-orientated and usually we would expect all manner of improvements as we look up the food chain. I have substantial real-world experience that validates my opinion, but I am also aware of such things as "personal preference" and "system synergy" and I am OK with that.

 

IN MY OWN SYSTEM

I recently went from my digital signal path being of a more direct route (INNUOS Music Server---->>USB out--->>T+A DAC200) to adding a Holo RED streaming transport (INNUOS Music Server---->>Ethernet--->>HOLO RED--->>USB out--->>T+A DAC200) and found noticeable improvements in the new setup. There could be numerous reasons why this may be - I don't care, to my ears performance has increased so the HOLO RED is staying for now.

 

IN MY DAILY LIFE
Fortunate to play with lots of wonderful products our industry affords me. I still stand by my belief that the Lumin X1 us the best streaming transport I've ever heard (I don't sell Lumin at this point). Why don't I own one? I simply cant afford one.

 

GENERAL COMMENTARY
I don't want to add to the debate and I'd rather not take sides, but just as a generalized observation, the companies that make and sell audiophile network switches and USB reclockers etc, even if the science suggests that they shouldn't make a difference, there is still SIGNIFICANT cost on a manufacturer to research, design, advertise and ultimately bring to market such a product, that its success or failure relies on the gullibility of a rather small portion of their own market. If I was the CEO of theses companies I would rather invest in proven technologies and categories (speakers, amplifiers etc) that don't require so much fact checking to sell.

[NonPlayableCharacter]

Threads go on post-approval to slow things down and take the heat out of the discussion.  It also makes a bunch more work for us which we'd rather not have to do to be honest. I want my Saturday evening with Mrs Tel, a steak and a big red; I'm sure you want similar.

 

So given the OP's request to have the thread taken off post-approval we've done that. But we will apply a zero tolerance policy for guideline breaches. No more protecting you from yourselves.

 

The Guidelines are very clear on acceptable behaviour. If you are not 100% familiar with them, go read them again before posting as you will not get a second chance.

 

Think very carefully about what and how you post. Is it helpful to the discussion? Is it truthful? Are you continuing with a personal vendetta in your wording?

 

To help you a bit with what will get you a suspension, here are some examples:

 

Example 1:

If you keep banging on about the same thing (no matter how valid you think your argument is), you'll get a suspension if you do not heed warnings (hint, this post is one of those warnings).

Examples of  "same thing" :

 "there's more to what we hear than just measurements, listen for yourself"

"it's not possible that there's a difference because of what the science says"

 

Example 2:

When repeated over and over, saving people from misinformation is not "being constructive" in your arguments

When repeated over and over, opening peoples minds to "trusting their ears" is not  "being constructive" in your arguments

 

Example 3:

Saying stuff and then trying to wriggle out of it by saying "they didn't assume positive intent" won't cut it.

That includes stuff like "oh here we go again, the subjectivists/objectivists always pop up and spoil these discussions".

 

Have at it. Be kind. Be respectful.

[aussievintage]

1 hour ago, Hydrology said:

I don't want to add to the debate and I'd rather not take sides, but just as a generalized observation, the companies that make and sell audiophile network switches and USB reclockers etc, even if the science suggests that they shouldn't make a difference, there is still SIGNIFICANT cost on a manufacturer to research, design, advertise and ultimately bring to market such a product, that its success or failure relies on the gullibility of a rather small portion of their own market. If I was the CEO of theses companies I would rather invest in proven technologies and categories (speakers, amplifiers etc) that don't require so much fact checking to sell.

 

I agree, but if I was the CEO, not only would the less risky path, the one supported by proper science and testing, be more attractive, but I would sleep better at night knowing I was providing a product the genuinely does what it is intended and promoted to do.  However, I believe many a "CEO" of a small hifi company, may  actually believe the hype.

 

Also, don't overplay the SIGNIFICANT cost angle.  There's at least one company that was "caught" re badging and selling a standard device (a network switch, I believe it was - wish I could remember the name)

 

 

Edited January 26 by aussievintage

[aussievintage]

1 hour ago, Hydrology said:

High-end infers price-orientated and usually we would expect all manner of improvements as we look up the food chain.

 

I would expect the same, although I am not sure about the term "price-oriented"    There's so much room for an item to be better, starting with just looks, durability, improved usability, better and more options, better support, better warranty,   and all these things definitely justify a bigger price.  I would definitely pay more for a streamer that delivered these things, even though I might not expect it to sound much different.    The interface, it's facility and user friendliness, would be very high on the list for me, for example.  

 

[bob_m_54]

46 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

I would expect the same, although I am not sure about the term "price-oriented"

But isn't that the claim of many consumers, in any area of consumer goods, that don't really understand the technical aspects of their purchase?

"It costs more so it must be better", "you only get what you pay for" etc etc etc.

It then becomes one of the "sound rules for purchasing"

 

Tell that to Jack and his handfull of beans LOL

 

Although he did get more than he bargained for...

[NonPlayableCharacter]

1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

There's at least one company that was "caught" re badging and selling a standard device (a network switch, I believe it was - wish I could remember the name)

 

Yep. One time denizen of these parts, @The Mad Scientist, did a tear-down and discovered a Zyxel switch inside either a Silent Angel or an EE chassis - I can't remember which. It's a shame that this happens as it only obfuscates any meaningful investigation. It undermines the acolytes of network tweaks and makes it harder to find truth.

[aussievintage]

28 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

"It costs more so it must be better", "you only get what you pay for" etc etc etc.

It then becomes one of the "sound rules for purchasing"

 

Yes, definitely false reasoning.  A hopeful tactic,  for when you don't know  what you are looking at, that usually fails.

[Bass13]

No disrespect to anyone, but there can be too many views on the same source, going either way, some advising there's little difference can be someone else's massive difference, or Visa Versa.

 

If possibly...  ask if any SNA members near you, that are/might be willing to bring their unit over to test on your system, or possibly a shop that will let you audition it at home, that's really the only way to be sure, if your happy with what your hearing, go from there.

 

Personally I will not buy any source, that I cannot test on my system first.

 

[MattyW]

45 minutes ago, El Tel said:

 

Yep. One time denizen of these parts, @The Mad Scientist, did a tear-down and discovered a Zyxel switch inside either a Silent Angel or an EE chassis - I can't remember which. It's a shame that this happens as it only obfuscates any meaningful investigation. It undermines the acolytes of network tweaks and makes it harder to find truth.

 

I believe there's quite a few audiophile switches that are just regular off the shelf switches just with a linear power supply and a few other tweaks. Not that uncommon unfortunately. I believe there's one or two using Linksys innards as well.

 

The issue for me is that I've absolutely and repeatedly heard differences on the networking side of things even with non audio grade gear (I've had nice benefits with a custom opnSense router for example).  Generally I'll get something and if it doesn't give me an improvement sell it on.  One of these days I've absolutely love to get my hands on a Network Acoustics Tempus network switch for example but I just can't justify the expense to myself. Not yet anyway.

[The Mad Scientist]

50 minutes ago, El Tel said:

 

Yep. One time denizen of these parts, @The Mad Scientist, did a tear-down and discovered a Zyxel switch inside either a Silent Angel or an EE chassis - I can't remember which. It's a shame that this happens as it only obfuscates any meaningful investigation. It undermines the acolytes of network tweaks and makes it harder to find truth.

Back in January of 2022, there was a discussion on the Roon Community around  routers/switches and ethernet cables and the possibility of audible effects. It was eventually shut down as it all got very out of hand very quickly.

 

There was discussion around a YouTube "review" of the Silent Angel and EE "audiophile" ethernet switches by Hans Beekhuyzen. In his review videos, he showed internals of both switches.

 

Being the inquisitive sort of chap that I am, I did some digging around on t'interwebs and found that both switches' physical layouts were uncannily similar to the bargain Zyxel GS108 switch. So I bought one from Amazon and took it apart.

 

Indeed, both the Silent Angel and EE switches are but humble Zyxel GS108s under the hood. Even the board revisions were identical 

 

The chunky case of the EE aside, the only internal difference between the "audiophile" switches and the Zyxel is the replacement of the stock clock crystal with a 0.1 ppm 25 MHz TCXO.

 

A completely superfluous and ethically questionable "upgrade". As I'm sure @El Tel will confirm, ethernet clocks only need to be accurate +/- 100 ppm to meet spec and in real terms there's even more leeway before there's any actual performance impact. 

 

Better precision doesn't mean better performance. People talk about network jitter and how a better clock can improve this whilst completely failing to understand how the TCP/IP ethernet protocol works. As long as the clock is good enough to ensure the data packets arrive unmolested at the other end of the cable, that's all that's required.

 

A more precise clock does absolutely nothing to the data, so there can be no performance improvement from adding one.

[a.dent]

11 minutes ago, The Mad Scientist said:

Back in January of 2022, there was a discussion on the Roon Community around  routers/switches and ethernet cables and the possibility of audible effects. It was eventually shut down as it all got very out of hand very quickly.

 

There was discussion around a YouTube "review" of the Silent Angel and EE "audiophile" ethernet switches by Hans Beekhuyzen. In his review videos, he showed internals of both switches.

 

Being the inquisitive sort of chap that I am, I did some digging around on t'interwebs and found that both switches' physical layouts were uncannily similar to the bargain Zyxel GS108 switch. So I bought one from Amazon and took it apart.

 

Indeed, both the Silent Angel and EE switches are but humble Zyxel GS108s under the hood. Even the board revisions were identical 

 

The chunky case of the EE aside, the only internal difference between the "audiophile" switches and the Zyxel is the replacement of the stock clock crystal with a 0.1 ppm 25 MHz TCXO.

 

A completely superfluous and ethically questionable "upgrade". As I'm sure @El Tel will confirm, ethernet clocks only need to be accurate +/- 100 ppm to meet spec and in real terms there's even more leeway before there's any actual performance impact. 

 

Better precision doesn't mean better performance. People talk about network jitter and how a better clock can improve this whilst completely failing to understand how the TCP/IP ethernet protocol works. As long as the clock is good enough to ensure the data packets arrive unmolested at the other end of the cable, that's all that's required.

 

A more precise clock does absolutely nothing to the data, so there can be no performance improvement from adding one.

I thought you’d gone MIA @The Mad Scientist

 

Great to see you are still posting on SNA. I always enjoy your knowledgeable insights.

 

Maybe you could comment on the OP’s question. "Do high-end streamers make an audible difference?"

[The Mad Scientist]

21 minutes ago, a.dent said:

I thought you’d gone MIA @The Mad Scientist

 

Great to see you are still posting on SNA. I always enjoy your knowledgeable insights.

 

Maybe you could comment on the OP’s question. "Do high-end streamers make an audible difference?"

I appreciate it's been a while since I've been around these parts. There's been a lot going on in my life in the last year.

 

In my experience, streamers don't make any difference at all to a competently designed DAC. A streamer's sole function is to serve up a data stream for the DAC to convert to an analogue output.

 

Within reason, what can a streamer possibly do that could have an audible effect on the DAC's output?

[aussievintage]

24 minutes ago, The Mad Scientist said:

In my experience, streamers don't make any difference at all to a competently designed DAC. A streamer's sole function is to serve up a data stream for the DAC to convert to an analogue output.

 

Within reason, what can a streamer possibly do that could have an audible effect on the DAC's output?

 

and that's putting it in a nutshell ... 

 

Maybe ground loops and noise in the analogue output circuits of the DAC might be caused by the streamer and are one theoretically possible difference, but the times that will happen are small,  and it's kind of like saying one turntable sounds better than another because it doesn't cause a ground loop with the phono preamp.  IOW missing the point.

[Ivo72]

Hi,my chain  -the source is Qobus throgh Sumsung S9 plus with LDAC codec,ifi Audio Zen blue 3 with Qualcomm QCC518x chipset supporting Bluetooth 5,4,optical conection to Accuphase dp67 DAC section,balanced conection to Accuphase e530 amp. and the sound is superb.I always search for improvment so if you have any ideas I will be happy to hear about.Thank you very much.Greetings

[The Mad Scientist]

10 hours ago, Ivo72 said:

Hi,my chain  -the source is Qobus throgh Sumsung S9 plus with LDAC codec,ifi Audio Zen blue 3 with Qualcomm QCC518x chipset supporting Bluetooth 5,4,optical conection to Accuphase dp67 DAC section,balanced conection to Accuphase e530 amp. and the sound is superb.I always search for improvment so if you have any ideas I will be happy to hear about.Thank you very much.Greetings

To my mind many audiophiles expend huge amounts of effort chasing the minutiae when there are much bigger fish to fry.

 

For example, taking an off the shelf pair of passive loudspeakers and plonking them in an untreated room. The speakers may be well-designed, with reasonably flat response, good phase integration between drivers and good directivity, or then again they may not.

 

Then there's the placement within the room and the interaction with the room. Deep bass nulls due to room modes and cancellations between the two speakers, high frequency reflections, comb filtering and the effects on timing of different driver acoustic centre distances from the listening position. 

 

The best advice I can give anyone is to take stock of your speakers and room. At the very least, buy a cheap measurement microphone, a suitable interface and download a free copy of REW. There are some really easy to follow guides around. A bit of room correction and some acoustic treatments (I appreciate WAF can be an issue here) will reap huge return on invested time and money. More than any component-level tinkering ever could.

 

I spent a year building a pretty decent pair of wide-baffle speakers which I very carefully placed in a well-treated room, then did some room correction with REW and Rephase. Probably the best setup I've heard to date. I'm still not happy though, because I know there's more to be achieved.

 

So now I'm deep in the hole of a fully-active crossover design with linear phase filters, driver linearisation and precise time and phase alignment.

 

Once I'm done, I may well need to then go back and tweak the speaker design to improve the mid/tweeter directivity integration and start all over again.

 

Then I'll probably look at adding subs and starting all over again.....

 

By the time I'm finished, I should have as near perfect reproduction of the source material in my room as is possible to achieve without precipitating a divorce.

 

I wasted years of my life reading reviews and trying new stuff that never lived up to the hype.

 

Now I live entirely within the realms of scientific objectivity with 2 unconditional precepts:

 

1. If it can't be measured, it can't be audible.

 

2. Even if it can be measured, it doesn't guarantee it will be audible.

 

Graeme

Edited January 26 by The Mad Scientist

[BugPowderDust]

4 hours ago, The Mad Scientist said:

To my mind many audiophiles expend huge amounts of effort chasing the minutiae when there are much bigger fish to fry.

 

For example, taking an off the shelf pair of passive loudspeakers and plonking them in an untreated room.

I agree 100% and have gone extensively down this path lately, chasing the audio gremlins out of my compromised listening space.  

 

I think it's often far easier to tinker at the edges and think you're shifting the needle in terms of performance when the room then speakers then amplification make up the 20% part of the pareto principle that leads to 80% of the results.

 

I'm all for experimentation, but at least start where science tells you the gains are to be made first.

[NonPlayableCharacter]

2 hours ago, BugPowderDust said:

 

I think it's often far easier to tinker at the edges and think you're shifting the needle in terms of performance when the room then speakers then amplification make up the 20% part of the pareto principle that leads to 80% of the results.

 

Yep. I am assuming you're not referring to the 20% as being spend, but in terms of 20% of all the considerations and choices to be made in the audio chain all the way from source right through to the listening?

 

If I exclude my TT and that part of the setup as irrelevant to the discussion on digital and only consider room, speakers (and subs), and amplification then this constitutes 83% of total chain RRP costs. I used a total chain cost that does not skew the number too much towards the big 3 by considering an exhaustive array of items: cables, pre-amp/streamer/DAC, Dirac LBC licence, streaming setup incl Roon Core, NAS and network plus license costs for say 15year life of the system for both Roon and Qobuz). Even if I do include my TT setup and costs associated with that in the mix, the proportion of spend on the big 3 versus total is still over 75%.

 

We've drifted off topic a little for OP's purposes, but boiling it all down, you probably will find better results by focusing on the big issues first and it certainly provides context for newcomers as to where to allocate the big dollars first.

[aussievintage]

Yes, the point deserves underlining - to the OP - a streamer is NOT the place to start throwing big dollars.  IF it makes any difference it will be small, especially in terms of bang for buck,  compared to the other "80%" things being referred to here.

[mloutfie]

Yes i think that's often missed.  Don't spend $4000 streamer on a a $4000 speaker and amp setup.

 

But for someone that spent money on dedicated room, spent plenty times on measurement of room and speakers. When the next speaker/amp upgrade target is 10-20k away. Spending 2-4k more on streamer source might be worth a try. 

[The Mad Scientist]

7 minutes ago, mloutfie said:

Yes i think that's often missed.  Don't spend $4000 streamer on a a $4000 speaker and amp setup.

 

But for someone that spent money on dedicated room, spent plenty times on measurement of room and speakers. When the next speaker/amp upgrade target is 10-20k away. Spending 2-4k more on streamer source might be worth a try. 

There's no need to spend 2-4 k on a streamer.  Besides looks, maybe a little extra functionality and a fancy case, what is it going to provide over a much cheaper option?

 

That there will be no sonic improvement is already well established.

[muon*]

It's prudent to remember that many do not have the freedom of having a dedicated room, or even the freedom to install room treatments.

Edit: or even have their speakers positioned ideally.

Edited January 26 by muon*

[NonPlayableCharacter]

2 minutes ago, The Mad Scientist said:

There's no need to spend 2-4 k on a streamer.  Besides looks, maybe a little extra functionality and a fancy case, what is it going to provide over a much cheaper option?

 

That there will be no sonic improvement is already well established.

 

Whilst I am largely in agreement with you, the eye-candy factor still wants satisfying from time-to-time. My AV41 is a workhorse and is a bit of an ugly duckling in comparison to my McIntosh amps (no, I really can't defend those in terms of cost or performance against brands like Benchmark, for example).

 

Just like furniture, cars, watches, clothing etc, a lot of purchases are made in audio too, where form is allowed to lead function in the interests of aesthetic.

 

I guess my willingness to try stuff with no expectation either way, despite an analytical approach to most things and a history of testing for myself, means I would re-run my experiment again in the future with another streamer. Just because.

 

I'm not sure of the merits of listening to a system that one is not familiar with and to expect to be able to gauge the performance of a single part of its chain. I'm not convinced one is likely to learn much from that situation. I tend to agree with @Bass13that to properly evaluate something, it needs to be in your own system and environment, with the ability to swap the item back with your original item for comparison.

 

I'll also mention @Hydrology and his experiences of many years in the trade. My interest is piqued when someone with credibility that has access to a vast array of equipment makes a claim.