Any audiophile use computer (MacBook) as your audio streaming source?

I run Ubuntu Linux on a $125 PC I got from Amazon. My music library is on a USB drive I hang off of it. Of course it can stream. Linux is free. The Clementine music player looks a lot like iTunes, but I run JRiver for about $30.

I always laugh at all of the people with their $5000 streamers and such. More money than sense.

I do not have a $5k streamer anymore and use a cheap computer however, if you have a USB connection directly into your DAC and that USB is connected directly to your Linux computer, then the joke is on you. Same applies to Toslink, SPDIF, and AES connections.

I used to run JRiver and it works well. I have been running ROON for "free" for the past decade.

STREAMING 101. Do not stream directly from your computer into your DAC it is the worst way to stream and you can easily hear the grunge of that setup in the DACs output.

I use a $500 DELL PC to stream and it is nowhere close to my audio gear (different room different floor). I am not advocating an expensive solution. Use fibre optic cable ($40) before the DAC. This type of setup can be done for $1500 or less. I have one fibre setup for $700 (used gear)

BTW - the more expensive solutions mentioned here work well as does my Fibre based solution.

@yyzsantabarbara Interesting. Can you comment on your fiber setup? Toslink is fiber too, just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding.

@herman  Here’s part of your prior response and the possible source of our disconnect…

The DAC is doing the exact same amount of processing whether the incoming signal has jitter or it doesn't. The DAC operates exactly the same either way. The DAC doesn't have a circuit that detects jitter or noise and then "does more work" when it detects it.

No it does not do the same amount of processing if it has to deal with a signal that has more jitter.  By definition if a DAC receives a more poorly clocked signal it must work harder to clean up the signal than if it received a better signal.  That is the DAC having to work harder.  A DAC receiving a better signal by definition has less work to do to clean it up and can do it more effectively.  Maybe it’s the term “work harder” that you’re having a hard time with, but if a DAC has a clock that can manage 98% of the jitter that comes into it and the incoming signal contains less jitter then the jitter left after it re-clocks that signal has less remaining jitter and the DAC sounds better for it.  So maybe it’s just a matter of semantics and we can just agree that the less noise/jitter a DAC has to deal with the better it will sound, otherwise a DAC would sound the same regardless of the quality of the signal it receives, which you and I both have found is not the case.  Frankly I’m just happy you and I had the openness to even try a DDC and that we were honest about that the thing actually did provide worthwhile improvements as opposed to some others who’d just rather bury their head in the sand in total denial/ignorance…

As for the dude saying adding a DDC is just adding another box so can’t possibly help and is just a way for a manufacturer to make more profit, well that’s just stupid and not even worthy of a response.  Many, many people here have added a DDC and/or external clock and realized substantial sonic improvements, and while all else being equal I’d also prefer to have fewer boxes in the chain, all else is not always equal so sometimes the additional hardware and cables are well worth it.  I’ll say again, anyone who has a DAC should at least try a DDC and external clock because IME they can be relatively speaking a very cost-effective way to realize significant improvements.  Ok, I think this dead horse has been beat enough, so peace out.

@devinplombier I have commented on my Fibre based approach to streaming for about 8 years on this site. There are a couple of posts on this thread that gets into a bit of detail.

One thing to consider about my statements is that some genius level digital audio designers are also advocating the same approach as me. That is to use Fibre Optic cable, which is not the same as Toslink cable, as a moat before the DAC. A moat keeps intruders away, and in this case, it is the NETWORK noise from the upstream components, a computer, a printer, a security system, ethernet, etc ....

One thing to remember is that with the Fibre approach there is not much money to be made by the venders.

WiFi could also be great because the air could be the moat, but the solutions are not good at all at present. I have not used Aurelic gear, and they are pro WiFi. That gear is supposed to be very good.