for streaming why not computer/galvanic isolation/DAC clock?

Hello and thanks for your help. I have been trying to figure out how to best stream to my set up and looked at many alternatives, all the conflicting posts  etc etc. I just wonder why one cannot use a computer with a device for good  galvanic isolation, and rely on the clock within the DAC to eliminate issues of jitter. If one is worried about SQ only (not the features of the software) what is wrong with this simple set up?  I bought a mac mini with extra memory (had dropouts until I upped the memory) and use an Innuos device for galvanic isolation. The Innuos has no external power supply and is built to use the power from the input USB, so no power in at that point (suppose a different device with linear power supply might make an improvement). I run a 3 foot long USB to the Innuous to keep noise away from my stuff. All power cords and interconnects are shielded and show nothing when I use a sniffer, even the one for the computer (you can get one of those from a company focused on people worried about EMI and health). I have Roon on the mini, and use the mini as the Roon server. When I use WiFi rather than an ethernet connection there are no dropouts;  I assume that is better than bringing in noise from ethernte. Thanks for your help - a mac mini is not cheap, but costs far less than high end streamers. Do people pay for the file management etc, or is the SQ better with a dedicated streamer? (My setup: RME ADI2 or Qutest DAC, ARC LS25 II pre, McIntosh 462 power amp).


I use a fanless mini PC w LPS controlled by ipad remote software into an Iris DDC for isolation and clocking to Pontus II DAC streaming Qobuz.  Sounds better to me than any streamer I’ve tried with comparable price point. PC was $300 new.  All in, approximately $2,800. 

In my starting post I said that I used Innuos for galvanic isolation. Sorry meant to say Intona. 

@arhgef - Thanks for the clarification.  I couldn't figure out which Innuos product you were using.  I believe the JCAT USB isolators are basically Intona products.  I have almost pulled the plug on an Intona isolator several times and have been curious about their performance and whether there would be any artifacts.  I have not heard noticable improvements from the several similar type products I have used (Uptone, W4S, and ifi).   I used the GigaFOILv4-INLINE Ethernet Filter for awhile but thought I was getting a bit of shrillness from it so currently using fiber for that. 

I have only tried the Intona and never heard it have a negative effect on the sound, just in some cases have no effect. I used a Qutest for a while and thought it improved the sound clearly, but didn’t do any blind a/b testing. I left it in place when I switched to the RME. Wish I could be more helpful. The Qutest is supposed to have its own galvanic isolation for usb, so I was surprised, but after a few trials decided the Intona really did help. I don’t remember this clearly,  but I believe I had to use an external power supply for the Intona with Qtest. The Intona can clean up the usb power with no external power source, and it does that for the RME, but I have read that it loses a little power in the process, maybe enough to stop the Qutest. I am not a huge fan of the measurements above all approach, but Amir likes the Intona.