Sound quality of Roon

@clearthink  there is the opposing camp that say bits are bits to what @blisshifi  is saying, that you need a highly resolving/expensive? system to tell the difference. So is it really the streamer and what specifically does it do to improve sound quality over the fact that you have a highly resolving/expensive? dac (possibly in the streamer) and great speakers? 

@sonicfanatic I always say bits are not just bits. Yes 0s and 1s are passed from a source and received at the destination, but the final result also considers timing (clocking) and the amount of noise (jitter, interference, power supply ripples, you name it) that is introduced into the signal alongside it. Better streamers/servers do a better job of improving the timing and reducing noise (while hopefully also introducing a more delightful user experience with its platform, but that’s not always the case). It has nothing to do with the resolution of the signal, but in the clarity, purity, and integrity of it.

I am hoping the community can corroborate this as you are requesting, but many threads on this forum already demonstrate how people are getting better results from their streamer upgrades, and why many manufacturers offer different tiers of performance in their streamer/server solutions at different price points, such as Innuos, Roon, Auralic, Aurender, Wolf Systems and others. Even NAD, as they own Bluesound still has their own units (The discontinued M50.2 server/streamer was my step up from the Bluesound Vault, and it was exceptionally better. Stereophile rated it a Class A component).

I appreciate the response and pointing out the two items you mention @blisshifi  and those are the two everyone says, noise and timing, but are you saying that you can hear music slower/faster or with more or less noise based on streamer? Who else can hear that?

@sonicfanatic "Timing" does not result in music going faster or slower - it is more about the interpretation of the data which as a result makes imaging more solid, or in the case of poor timing/clocking, makes the imaging sound more flabby or loose. So improved timing simply helps the signal produce sound that snaps/gels together.

The same paradigm applies to photography. Think of it as a lens that can produce an image that is completely in focus vs one that is just ever-so-slightly off focus that you might not really notice unless you had the two images side by side. Or even two lenses that may be equal in quality (Canon vs Nikon top of the lines). When people shoot with them, they perceive those images to be the best reproduction to what their eyes can see. But sometimes those manufacturers can bring new innovations to those lenses that improve upon the focus and clarity, even if used on the same camera body which produces the same image resolution.

Timing is one issue, based on clocking from the source (server/streamer), in the DAC, and the cable in between. For more fun, different digital interfaces (USB vs SPDIF) prioritize their clocks from different places. USB uses the DACs clock, whereas AES prioritizes the source’s clock. Some DACs will still reclock a SPDIF signal, and this can result in both great and poor outcomes, depending on how good the clock from the source already is. Many people don’t like the USB interface because it tends to be noisier, even if the DAC offers incredible clocking. This is typically due to lack of isolation in the ports and circuitry, and the fact that most USB cables are powered, carrying 5VDC in parallel conductors with the digital signal. So what one might gain from clocking they may lose in noise.

Noise is a whole other issue. Much noise in digital is indescribable. It’s not that you hear the noise like white noise, but it does cause some distortion to the output and you will know when you hear less noise in comparison. Lower noise reduces fatigue when listening over time, and with digital sources lower noise also tends to shift the tonal balance to feel more natural because it tames some of the fatiguing peaks and allows you to hear more, easier, and do so in a more relaxed way.

With this in mind, even though SPDIF sources are generally limited to 192khz resolution, many people prefer this interface because of the improved clocking and reduction and noise compared to a higher resolution signal such as a USB which can deliver 768khz of resolution, but at times with shortcomings due to noise and timing. Some DACs are designed without USB in mind because of this principle, like Berkeley’s reference which are around ~$25K, or the Aqua Formula xHD at around ~$13-15K. They prefer to offer a max resolution of ~192khz.

Thanks again @blisshifi  for the explanation and the two factors you raise are imaging of the sound towards more life like and fatiguing peaks which I assume tends towards the higher end of the frequency response. Are others hearing these differences as a result of a streamer change and not related to dac or speakers? Or have you had the experience where the streamer does not not appear to make a difference? How expensive did your system need to be to hear this difference? Did you have lower cost systems before where you could not hear the difference?