Are "streamers" the new "transports"?

Yes, I have no idea why and cost is not really the issue.

I just went from a Raspberry Pi 3 to 4, and from a tinyCore Linux to Ubuntu, running the same software packages which are Squeezelite and LMS 7.9. The Pi 4 sounds much more open and transparent. Everything from the USB cable on forward is the same.


Is it the aluminum case? The OS? Lower noise in the USB output,  a quieter power supply, or the fanless operation?

Is it the additional compute and memory capability of the 4 makes it much more responsive and reduces jitter in the output? No idea.


However, this cost me < $150

This kind of brings up something else.


DAC's are not equally indifferent to the quality of the input signal.

Unfortunately, audiophiles are often lured by "discerning" DAC's (and speakers). That is, they buy the DAC that lets them hear a difference in transports.

To me, the ideal DAC has such a great input stage that it is completely indifferent to any reasonably good source, and many have gone to extremes to do this. The Parasound CD player for instance would read tracks into memory and play from there instead of the CD to ensure the least amount of jitter in the output. Other RAM-centric players and streamers and DAC's have appeared with the same idea.


Of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. :)

In digital, its always something new. The King is dead. Long live the King. 

Yes I think streamer’s and streamer/servers are the new "transports".

As far as things that contribute to better sound quality goes it’s the same basic things that are needed with other digital transports. Things like high quality audio grade parts, minimizing electrical noise by isolating components, minimizing jitter, better power supplies, controlling vibration etc. All that stuff applies to most all audio gear. Mass market computers are not designed for audio and so company’s are designing dedicated components optimized for audio performance.

Basically, "yes" but with one big caveat. For most of the time transports have been on this earth, they transmitted the data over SPDIF, in the original mode, which was isochronous. That meant that the timing of each sample transmitted was determined by the goodness of the clocking of the transport and the goodness of the recovery by the DAC.
So if there was jitter in the transport, the music is compromised.  I wont go into the math, but consider the "bits" the X-axis and the timing the Y axis, draw a curve and you get the idea.

USB, and a newer mode of SPDIF, are asynchronous.  In asynch protocols the transport, streamer, or well-trained parakeet just sends the data and the DAC gathers it up, reads it into memory, and re-times it.  So NOW the jitter is almost entirely under the DAC's control.  Other issues, such as digital noise enter the picture, but let's stay on the big difference for simplicity - and that's timing and jitter.
So the inference is that DACs today are less dependent on the goodness of the timing of the signal than in the older transport days. So my answer is "yes, exactly, but its less relevant today".
My two pence,
and I design the stuff,
G