Author Topic: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?  (Read 9594 times)

Offline James Edward

  • Obsessively Audiophilic
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« on: January 31, 2022, 01:29:58 PM »
I currently use a Bluesound Node 2i, which costs around 500.00, give or take 50 bucks.
I use the coax digital output to the DAC input on my cd player(listed below).
I wonder what changes if I buy a more expensive streaming device- what exactly would make it sound better provided I continue to use the same DAC?
I know this question may be basic, and I do not have any preconceived notions, other than that something more expensive might have less jitter, which would be important.
I’m speaking strictly of sound quality- I realize they all probably have a different interface that I would see on my ipad or other device.
Thanks.
Jim
Luxman L- 590 AX MK2
Esoteric K-07X
Pro-Ject Debut Carbon Esprit SB
Audience Au24SE
PI Cat6
Spatial Audio M3 Turbo S
Stereo Hsu ULS-15 Mk2
Supra Classic 6.0

Offline jimbones

  • Audio Neurotic
  • *****
  • Posts: 1290
  • Two plus Two Speakers
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2022, 02:55:53 PM »
Im no expert but I think that there probably wont be much difference. However I will let the Digiphiles chime in.
Rogue RP7 Pre, Art Audio Vinyl Reference Phono,CJ Premier 12 Pwr, VPI Classic II/Dynavector 20X2L, Roon Rock, Auralic Vega DAC, Emotiva ERC-3, MIT, TWL, WireWorld, Wywires, Shunyata

Offline tmazz

  • Out Of My Speaker Cabinet
  • ******
  • Posts: 12088
  • Just basking in the glow of my tubes.....
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2022, 05:09:44 PM »
The biggest difference that it will probably get you is the ability to play higher res files. The Bluesound is limited to 192/24 FLACs. a "better " streamer would let you get into the world of DSD and DXD files. DSD and DXD files can potentially be better, but that is dependent on the mastering, but having the ability to play them gives you access to more music, which is a big plus to me. Of course that assumes that your DAC can handle those files And if you are using the streamer tio only play online service like Tidal and Qobuz DSD and DXD campatability would not be an issuers for you.

Other than that what would you get? on the hardware side, most likely a better power supply, which can definitely help your SQ. And most likely a better DAC, but of course the question there is , Better than what? A better streamer would likely have a better DAC than the internal one in your Bluesound, but you are not using the Bluesond DAC now. So the real question would come down to is the DAC in streamer X better than the one built into your CD player?  That is tough to answer without doing a side by side demo.

A better streamer might have a better user interface, but not necessarily. The iFi $2500 DAC/Streamer came with really piss poor user software, not even close the the BluOS system  in a unit that cost 5X the price of a Bluesound Node. Go figure. Personally, I use Roon, so the manufacturer's software is really of no concern to me.

But the bottom line is that unless you are looking for additional functionality or end up getting a streamer with a built in DAC that is significantly better than what you have now I think the SQ changes from changing the streamer alone will not be all that big. It all just depends on how much of a change you would think is enough to drive a new purchase. I think you would probably get a bigger bang for the buck by chnaging out the DAC.
Remember, it's all about the music........

• Nola Boxers
• Sunfire True SW Super Jr (2)
• McIntosh MC 275
• ARC SP-9
• VPI HW-19 Mk IV/SDS/SME IV/Soundsmith Carmen Mk II ES
• Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC/Rasp Pi Roon Endpoint
• DigiBuss/TWL PC&USB/MIT Cables

Offline P.I.

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Silence is that blackness beneath the music
    • P.I. audio group, LLC
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2022, 06:30:59 PM »
Personally this is not an issue for me.  I stream Tidal through and much modified 2012 Core i7 Mac mini with a 1TB SSD that runs dB Audio Labs software instead of OSX.  I prefer NOS DACs because all of my music is Redbook.  I do have a Soekris 1021 DAC that will be finished once I finish shipping all of the orders that came in the last week of December.  Perhaps that will influence me, but I'm a geezer and don't hear like I used to.

To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer  🥸
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe

Offline Nick B

  • Audio Neurotic
  • *****
  • Posts: 4094
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2022, 08:55:12 PM »
I can’t speak regarding other streamers, but adding a dedicated power supply really improved the SQ on my Auralic Mini.
Orchard Starkrimson Ultra amp
Supratek Chardonnay preamp
JMR Voce Grande speakers
Border Patrol SEi dac
Holo Red streamer
Hapa Aero digital coax
WyWires Silver cables
TWL Digital American II p cord
Audio Envy p cords
Roon, Tidal, Qobuz
PI Audio UberBUSS

Offline tmazz

  • Out Of My Speaker Cabinet
  • ******
  • Posts: 12088
  • Just basking in the glow of my tubes.....
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #5 on: January 31, 2022, 09:00:34 PM »

To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer  🥸


Great wisdom retirement has brought you.  8)

Remember, it's all about the music........

• Nola Boxers
• Sunfire True SW Super Jr (2)
• McIntosh MC 275
• ARC SP-9
• VPI HW-19 Mk IV/SDS/SME IV/Soundsmith Carmen Mk II ES
• Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC/Rasp Pi Roon Endpoint
• DigiBuss/TWL PC&USB/MIT Cables

Offline P.I.

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Silence is that blackness beneath the music
    • P.I. audio group, LLC
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2022, 12:07:58 PM »

To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer  🥸


Great wisdom retirement has brought you.  8)


:thumb:
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe

Offline James Edward

  • Obsessively Audiophilic
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2022, 01:19:54 PM »
Thank you all for the replies- I should have stated that this particular question is not gnawing at me in the same way as a cartridge upgrade is- https://www.audionervosa.com/index.php?topic=8385.0 I KNOW I can do better cartridge-wise.
I actually like the way the streaming sounds, though it does not sound as good as a CD playing through the same internal DAC of my player.
As usual, I find Tom’s advice to be a good, sober assessment. In fact, I’ve found some hi-res files too ‘microscopic’, drawing me away from the music; it’s enticing at first listen, then I feel like it’s an autopsy of the music. I’ve certainly not heard enough iterations of hi-res, nor do I profess to have golden ears, so I’m sure there’s much to learn.

Luxman L- 590 AX MK2
Esoteric K-07X
Pro-Ject Debut Carbon Esprit SB
Audience Au24SE
PI Cat6
Spatial Audio M3 Turbo S
Stereo Hsu ULS-15 Mk2
Supra Classic 6.0

Offline P.I.

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Silence is that blackness beneath the music
    • P.I. audio group, LLC
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2022, 07:16:52 PM »
Thank you all for the replies- I should have stated that this particular question is not gnawing at me in the same way as a cartridge upgrade is- https://www.audionervosa.com/index.php?topic=8385.0 I KNOW I can do better cartridge-wise.
I actually like the way the streaming sounds, though it does not sound as good as a CD playing through the same internal DAC of my player.
As usual, I find Tom’s advice to be a good, sober assessment. In fact, I’ve found some hi-res files too ‘microscopic’, drawing me away from the music; it’s enticing at first listen, then I feel like it’s an autopsy of the music. I’ve certainly not heard enough iterations of hi-res, nor do I profess to have golden ears, so I’m sure there’s much to learn.
The 'microscopic' seemingly hyper-detail that is brought by some hi-rez files and player/DACs just absolutely leave me cold.  I hate that presentation.  That is why I prefer the musicality of NOS DACs.  Couple that with the fact that I have ancient ears and, well...
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe

Offline tmazz

  • Out Of My Speaker Cabinet
  • ******
  • Posts: 12088
  • Just basking in the glow of my tubes.....
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2022, 10:20:15 PM »
Hi Res is not a magic bullet that will get you better sound. It is simply a tool that has the capability of transporting a higher level of SQ to you. But you need to keep in mind that how a recording is made and mastered is far more important that the technology that transports it to you. There are all kinds of people that get to stick their fingers in the sonic pie on its journey from the recording venue to your living room and they all have an effect on the final product. Think about it for years we have been listing to LPs that have been  reissued, remastered for different formats and remastered even for the same format. How many times have we listened to different versions of the same album and had them sound different. Surely some of that can be due to newer equipment or better technologies in the physical product production (e.g. 1/2 speed mastering, better vinyl formulas or just heavier LPs), but often we here differences in releases of of supposedly the same thing., like reissues of the same album all on standard vinyl.

We would all like to think that a recording is an accurate representation of what the music sounded like in the venue that it was played in. But in reality the recording is really more like what the production team thought it should have sounded like when it was originally played. Take a modern orchestral recording a full symphony orchestra is recorded with dozens of mics and them mixed down in the control room to what somebody decides it must have sounded like in the hall. Very often the people making those decisions spent the entire time in the control room and never actually heard for themselves what it did sound like in the hall. And then further on down the line a mastering engineer will further EQ the master tape as it is cut onto the lacquer. Not this may be a necessary part of getting to sound onto an LP and required to offset some of the limitations of the LP itself, but none the less it is putting somebody's subjective thoughts on what the final recording should sound like and again the folks making those calls very often were no where near the original recording  (and often don't even work for the same company).

I would dare say that what you are hearing as hyper detail is not as much a function of the hi res format as it is the mastering of those files. Enhanced detail can easily be done in the recording or the mastering by boosting the EQ it certain frequencies. An that can be done just as easily on LPs or CD as it can on hi res releases. It is just a matter of what the production teams wants the recording to sound like. The best you can hope for is something that you enjoy listening, regardless of how close it is to the original sound. And this doesn't even get into things that are totally created in the studio. Things like Dark Side of the Moon or Sgt Pepper were completely created in the minds of the artists and production team. so who is to say what they are "supposed to"" sound like.

Normally I would think that this is moving into the realm of a thread jacking, except for the fact that the OP was the one who directed is towards this discussion. If we want to go into this any deeper perhaps we should split this off to another thread (unless of course I have beaten this far enough into the ground to bore all of you.  :roll:)

I have a number of hi res files where the extra resolution is used not to produce etched in your face hyper detail but rather to more correctly present the ten fine details that provide us with spacial cues and room ambience. Those files use the ability to render more detail to provide you with a soundscape that makes you feel more like you are in the same acoustic space with the musicians as opposed to the hyper detail that gives you the audio equivalent of the visual experience you have sitting in the first row at an IMAX movie. But hey, a lot of audiophiles are detail junkies and like that kind of sound.

I guess what I am trying to say, in a kind of long winded way, is that I don't think that your impression of high res file is as much of a funtion of the file format is it is of the production process adn the value judgements and decisions of the folks involve in that process


Remember, it's all about the music........

• Nola Boxers
• Sunfire True SW Super Jr (2)
• McIntosh MC 275
• ARC SP-9
• VPI HW-19 Mk IV/SDS/SME IV/Soundsmith Carmen Mk II ES
• Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC/Rasp Pi Roon Endpoint
• DigiBuss/TWL PC&USB/MIT Cables

Offline P.I.

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Silence is that blackness beneath the music
    • P.I. audio group, LLC
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2022, 07:16:00 AM »
Hi Res is not a magic bullet that will get you better sound. It is simply a tool that has the capability of transporting a higher level of SQ to you. But you need to keep in mind that how a recording is made and mastered is far more important that the technology that transports it to you. There are all kinds of people that get to stick their fingers in the sonic pie on its journey from the recording venue to your living room and they all have an effect on the final product. Think about it for years we have been listing to LPs that have been  reissued, remastered for different formats and remastered even for the same format. How many times have we listened to different versions of the same album and had them sound different. Surely some of that can be due to newer equipment or better technologies in the physical product production (e.g. 1/2 speed mastering, better vinyl formulas or just heavier LPs), but often we here differences in releases of of supposedly the same thing., like reissues of the same album all on standard vinyl.

We would all like to think that a recording is an accurate representation of what the music sounded like in the venue that it was played in. But in reality the recording is really more like what the production team thought it should have sounded like when it was originally played. Take a modern orchestral recording a full symphony orchestra is recorded with dozens of mics and them mixed down in the control room to what somebody decides it must have sounded like in the hall. Very often the people making those decisions spent the entire time in the control room and never actually heard for themselves what it did sound like in the hall. And then further on down the line a mastering engineer will further EQ the master tape as it is cut onto the lacquer. Not this may be a necessary part of getting to sound onto an LP and required to offset some of the limitations of the LP itself, but none the less it is putting somebody's subjective thoughts on what the final recording should sound like and again the folks making those calls very often were no where near the original recording  (and often don't even work for the same company).

I would dare say that what you are hearing as hyper detail is not as much a function of the hi res format as it is the mastering of those files. Enhanced detail can easily be done in the recording or the mastering by boosting the EQ it certain frequencies. An that can be done just as easily on LPs or CD as it can on hi res releases. It is just a matter of what the production teams wants the recording to sound like. The best you can hope for is something that you enjoy listening, regardless of how close it is to the original sound. And this doesn't even get into things that are totally created in the studio. Things like Dark Side of the Moon or Sgt Pepper were completely created in the minds of the artists and production team. so who is to say what they are "supposed to"" sound like.

Normally I would think that this is moving into the realm of a thread jacking, except for the fact that the OP was the one who directed is towards this discussion. If we want to go into this any deeper perhaps we should split this off to another thread (unless of course I have beaten this far enough into the ground to bore all of you.  :roll:)

I have a number of hi res files where the extra resolution is used not to produce etched in your face hyper detail but rather to more correctly present the ten fine details that provide us with spacial cues and room ambience. Those files use the ability to render more detail to provide you with a soundscape that makes you feel more like you are in the same acoustic space with the musicians as opposed to the hyper detail that gives you the audio equivalent of the visual experience you have sitting in the first row at an IMAX movie. But hey, a lot of audiophiles are detail junkies and like that kind of sound.

I guess what I am trying to say, in a kind of long winded way, is that I don't think that your impression of high res file is as much of a funtion of the file format is it is of the production process adn the value judgements and decisions of the folks involve in that process
Well said.

I think you missed my point, which in reality is exactly what you eluded to: production and mastering values or, more accurately, the lack of it.

I was in and out of the studio for over 50 years working both sides of the glass.  As an engineer, mixer and mastered I was sometimes guilty of exactly what you eluded to: eking every bit of high end out of the recording knowing how much would be lost in the transfer to production master by most repro houses and manufacturers.

Another BIG issue was the entire transition to digital audio in the '80s and early '90s.  So much of it was done on recorders that were giving 12-14 bit resolution and processed by really crappy SS gear and through equally bad consoles.  Not everyone could afford a Neve or SSL console.  Add to that poor tracking of anti-aliasing, stoned studio people (hell, in the 80's cocaine was considered a vegetable) and sources like Columbia Record Club turning out absolutely terrible product.

Case in point:  my daughter had a CRR sourced copy of Bonnie Raitt's "Streetlights" CD.  I had the same one from Record Warehouse.  Her copy was dismal in comparison to mine.  Perfect Sound Forever, right?

Don't get me wrong.  There have been a lot of wonderful recordings mastered by greats like Ludwig, Grundman, Watson, Clearmountain, Williams and a lot of young guns.  Unfortunately in the contemporary music scene and in less commercial music like I prefer terrific mastering tends to be the exception, not the rule. 

A lot of the music I like comes from the '60s through the 80's and newer indie recordings of acoustic music and eclectic groups.  All too often, hi-rez does them no favors.

Bottom line:  a lot of recordists and masterers today have all of their taste in their mouths.

"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe

Offline rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 6982
  • Rollo Audio - Home demo the only way to know
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2022, 09:04:55 AM »
  Jim if you would like to borrow a music server to find out let me know. My system is down . The Innuos sounds great with streaming Qobuz and playing dedicated Hi Rez DSD files. All ya need is an Ethernet cable from router. Nothing like a hands on demo. I agree with most of what has been said by Tom.

charles
contact me  at rollo14@verizon.net or visit us on Facebook
Lamm Industries - Aqua Acoustic, Formula & La Scala DAC- INNUOS  - Rethm - Kuzma - QLN - Audio Hungary Qualiton - Fritz speakers -Gigawatt -Vinnie Rossi,TWL, Swiss Cables, Merason DAC.

Offline steve

  • Audiologist
  • *
  • Posts: 1240
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2022, 09:40:29 AM »
"To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer. "

I am attempting to grasp what you are saying. Are you saying you decreased the highs in your system? May I ask
what method of reproducing the highs, full range or tweeter?

Or are some/many of the recordings themselves with too much top end, and therefore need taming? The mids are ok?

Or the music seems not natural across most if not all of the musical spectrum? (more than just the highs.) A little thin in the mids as well, sounds like a recording rather than being at the venue itself?

Or completely off, another meaning?

I am having trouble getting a grasp of what you are meaning.

Thanks and cheers

steve





« Last Edit: February 09, 2022, 09:45:23 AM by steve »
Steve Sammet (Owner, Electron Eng, SAS Audio Labs, Ret)
SAS "V" 39pf/m 6N copper ICs,
SAS Test Phono Stage
Acutex 320 STR Mov Iron Cart
SAS 11A Perfect Tube Preamp
SAS 25 W Ref Triode/UL Monoblocks
2 way Floor Standing Test Speakers

Offline P.I.

  • Industry Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Silence is that blackness beneath the music
    • P.I. audio group, LLC
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2022, 10:49:51 AM »
"To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer. "

I am attempting to grasp what you are saying. Are you saying you decreased the highs in your system? May I ask
what method of reproducing the highs, full range or tweeter?

Or are some/many of the recordings themselves with too much top end, and therefore need taming? The mids are ok?

Or the music seems not natural across most if not all of the musical spectrum? (more than just the highs.) A little thin in the mids as well, sounds like a recording rather than being at the venue itself?

Or completely off, another meaning?

I am having trouble getting a grasp of what you are meaning.

Thanks and cheers

steve
It is simple, really.

Hi-rez does not meet my needs.  I prefer good old tried and true 44.1/16 Redbook through a very good NOS DAC without the phase shift from ragged brick wall filters.  As I have aged (and still keep going to the gun range) my hearing is not what it used to be.

The musicality of a good NOS DAC has always been my preference.  Add to this the fact that I have terrbytes of Redbook and I'm just a happy listener.
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe

Offline steve

  • Audiologist
  • *
  • Posts: 1240
Re: What Does a More Expensive/‘Better’ Streamer Give Me?
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2022, 04:51:53 PM »
"To me it is all about the music (yay, Tom!) and ultimate resolution became less important to me a few years ago when I discovered foot tapping trumping the top octave harmonic series.  I'm just not into audiophile delusion any longer. "

I am attempting to grasp what you are saying. Are you saying you decreased the highs in your system? May I ask
what method of reproducing the highs, full range or tweeter?

Or are some/many of the recordings themselves with too much top end, and therefore need taming? The mids are ok?

Or the music seems not natural across most if not all of the musical spectrum? (more than just the highs.) A little thin in the mids as well, sounds like a recording rather than being at the venue itself?

Or completely off, another meaning?

I am having trouble getting a grasp of what you are meaning.

Thanks and cheers

steve
It is simple, really.

Hi-rez does not meet my needs.  I prefer good old tried and true 44.1/16 Redbook through a very good NOS DAC without the phase shift from ragged brick wall filters.  As I have aged (and still keep going to the gun range) my hearing is not what it used to be.

The musicality of a good NOS DAC has always been my preference.  Add to this the fact that I have terrbytes of Redbook and I'm just a happy listener.

What I am having trouble reconciling is your hearing is not what it used to be due to gun shots, yet the highs in
high rez recordings is offending you. Just curious.

(For general public: Hi rez contains "info" above 20khz which can mess with the dynamics, attacks (rise time) etc.
(That is if the original material is recorded to higher frequencies.))

Anyway, I find the same principle with LPs. There is a recording pole approximately 50khz, which "stops" the gain. However, no one designs a counter pole in playback electronics. I realized this, and the frequency from Stanley
Lipshitz article.

I found out why no one adds the playback pole at 50khz when I installed it. The highs became unbearable to me. (I had always heard that recording engineers back in the day often over emphasized the highs for LPs due to the playback wear of the soft vinyl. This was a separate high frequency setting, not in the RIAA circuit.)

It is quite possible that a speaker adjustment may be necessary to compensate for the higher frequency response high rez creates. With the higher frequency response, rise times (attack in laymen's terms) will change, possibly giving the impression of more highs.

cheers and all the best Dave.

steve 




« Last Edit: February 11, 2022, 10:24:17 AM by steve »
Steve Sammet (Owner, Electron Eng, SAS Audio Labs, Ret)
SAS "V" 39pf/m 6N copper ICs,
SAS Test Phono Stage
Acutex 320 STR Mov Iron Cart
SAS 11A Perfect Tube Preamp
SAS 25 W Ref Triode/UL Monoblocks
2 way Floor Standing Test Speakers