Discerning a difference between streamers is difficult...only me or common for all?

Yes, @mclinnguy, there’s numerous factors to weigh and consider often system dependent. As another small example, the Cisco Meraki was better than the Cisco Catalyst 2960. Had read about Meraki couplings and other adjustments. Removed the power supplies from the two Merakis and thought that was also a nice improvement. No digging into the settings needed on any of them. More improvement with choice of SFP too.

That narrowed the performance but the RME ADI-2 is the master via USB and so that application remained superior streaming via computer versus optical out from the WiiM Pro. (That too has changed ironically going back to Roon. Now Roon on the M1 MacBook Air is more dynamic and superior even using glass toslink.)

In some earlier configurations, I didn’t see improvement but learned along the way and have seen a remarkable improvement with the fiber aspects here starting from a Verizon fiber router to the streamer. Additionally, although I’m not a big cable guy, on the ethernet front I’ve seen a nice uptick in performance using Blue Jeans ethernet cables.

As the streamer technology continues to narrow audible improvement, performance is likely to be succeeded by elegance, usability options and ease of implementation. From this perspective, DACs may be more interesting in performance differences although I remain a believer in starting with the best amplification one can obtain, IMHO.

@romanesq 

You bring up a solid point. Amplification quality is crucial because it directly influences how well the entire system will perform, especially with speakers. A high-quality amplifier can bring out the best in a set of speakers, ensuring the nuances and dynamics of the sound are accurately reproduced. In contrast, a mediocre amplifier can bottleneck even the best speakers.

As for DACs and streamers, while improvements have been noticeable in recent years, I believe they’ve reached a point where further upgrades provide diminishing returns for many users. The differences becoming less perceptible to the average listener, especially when paired with good amplification and speakers.

That being said, finding the correct (synergy) amplification with speakers, is often the most tangible improvement and solid foundation for a system. After that, the incremental improvements from DACs and streamers easily more noticeable. 

As far as fiber optics or conventional copper LAN, whichever path one chooses; I recommend some kind of filtering ahead of your streamer or server can pay huge dividends, IME. 

Copper->Fiber->Copper didn’t work for me. Glassy and artificial in my system. 
I agree on the amplification being almost as critical as the speakers. Amplifiers make a huge difference. But…GIGO. You will hear all the upstream nasties better. On the other hand upgrade the source with a crappy amp and you have a bottleneck - you wasted $ and you’re unable to realize your source components full potential. It’s an endless loop but getting the amp right is still the most important piece (once your speakers and room acoustics are addressed). 

“Copper->Fiber->Copper didn’t work for me”
@audphile1 

To my earlier post on your Aurender thread, if you eliminate the use of fiber optic cable between transceiver, you’re likely to hear much more organic presentation. It’s the darn conversion between the transceiver robbing the dynamics, IME. 

I had a Lumin U2 and experimented with fiber direct to its SFP port from a GIGE switch also with SFP fiber port; Researched the heck out of it and ordered all the parts from DigiKey. Let it settle for a week. To my ears it did not sound as good as copper CAT8 cable from the same GIGE switch. The magic was gone. I’m guessing that it’s system dependent as many users love fiber. 🤷‍♂️