Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

Looked at the PS Audio Bridge. Looks like their own design. Its gotten some good reviews....

Mcondon,
In theory I totally understand your preference for the 'big established" manufacturers, they do suggest a sense of stability and confidence. It's been my experience/observation that it is the "cottage" 1 or 2 man companies who consistently produce the better sounding and more satisfying components. Be it DACs, speakers, cables amplifiers etc. They seem to get it right more often. It could certainly be the case that your experiences differ from mine.
Charles,

knghifi - Isn't the storage of the data in a buffer after de-packetization in the device sufficient?

Yes. Not familiar with your design.

Just curious, how big is the buffer or how much do you cache in time domain?

Agear, I didn't know about these two, but glad to see more are doing this.

Though the SDT-M plays up to 384kHz PCM and DSD512, here is something else I've also played with that does 192k and DSD64 in DoP format. I don't think it can be outperformed with a computer either: QA660 SD card player

Best,
Alex Peychev
APL Hi-Fi

If manufacturers of servers adhere to the UPnP or DLNA protocol, the inherent advantages of a server become moot. Here's why. Data in a UPnP system is sent in packetized, asynchronous form, meaning that it has to be buffered on both ends and has no clock signal embedded in it. So there's no jitter and no difference in the data on either end unless the server or the network is having problems. That's the technical advantage: it removes the problems associated with digital transmission and always provides the best possible data to the renderer ("DAC"). Variables are a bad thing. Just rip your music with good, high quality ripping software and your music should be worry-free.

Servers have some advantages, but are not a perfect solution. They have limited storage capacity and in many cases have the DAC and analog section in the same chassis with a noisy computer server. This is why Boulder adopted the UPnP protocol instead: any true media server can be used, the interface is universal and plug and play, and the server itself has no impact on sound quality because it's streamed asynchronously over ethernet.

The key is implementation. Boulder built the 1021 network player with a UPnP-compliant renderer and optimize the player to stream music. And their own tests comparing high res rips over ethernet vs the same cd played on the 1021 demonstrated ripped music sounds better in most cases (and keep in mind the 1021 is one of the few disc spinners which buffers the music).

With that said, I think servers have enormous potential if you accept their limitations, and if you look at the current top dogs such as the Aurender W20 & The Beast, we wont have long to wait for a real game changer to hit the market.