Streaming vs. CD

@rvpiano -- I'm glad to hear that the Cambridge CXN is working out for you. I remember reading one of your posts where I think you were not too thrilled with the Node 2i. 

When you say the Cambridge streamer is better than Node 2i, are you comparing them purely on the basis of streamer-only criteria, i.e. using an external DACs in both cases? I would really appreciate it if you can tell us what aspects of sound quality have improved going from Node to Cambridge. TIA.

arafiq,

Yes, the same DAC was used in both cases.
The Cambridge uses built-in Chromecast for hi-res files.
Downside is Chromecast streams only up to 96 kHz and inserts a brief pause between tracks. In Airplay mode there’s no pause but no hi-res.
However, the upside is that I believe the SQ to be better than
Node 2i in both modes no matter what the resolution  rate. To me, it’s just a fuller and more detailed sound. YMMD.

‘The Cambridge also has many features the Node doesn’t.
It’s worth a test try.

Thanks, @rvpiano!

I usually just use Roon for all my streaming needs nowadays, so Chromecast or Airplay modes are not of much use. I did try Airplay with Node 2i and agree that it was not all that good, same with Bluetooth.

I'll be on the lookout for a used CA CXN2 for sure.

 I stream using Qubuz through my Aurender music server/streamer.  I purchased the Aurender ACS-10 unit because it allows for ripping my CDs to the internal hard drive and also to a backup NAS. 

Listening to the music via the internal hard drive vs the streamed music, I can tell the difference slightly, but just slightly most times.  But, when I put a CD on my CD/transport unit into my DAC and listen and then switch to the Aurender unit (either streamed music via Qubuz or via internal hard drive), all into my Audio Research DAC, seriously, 100% of the time, the CD into the DAC sounds noticeably better.  

Don't get me wrong, the Aurender into the Audio Research DAC 9, either streamed or via the internal hard drive sounds excellent.  which is why I purchased the Aurender unit in the first place.

It's just that my CD transport into the DAC sounds better, more open and nice.  As an Engineer, I can't explain this because the Aurender copies bit perfect.  Oh well.

A very good friend of mine was streaming to his Mark Levinson DAC via an Amazon Prime music streamer. He was okay with this.  CD to DAC was very much better.  Then he purchased a Cambridge streamer and it is wayyyy better than the Amazon Prime streamer.  But!!! the Mark Levinson CD/Transport to his Mark Levinson DAC is still better than his streamer to DAC.

The good thing is that both now make him smile and enjoy.

enjoy

One conundrum on this issue I have not been able to resolve in my mind is that almost without exception CD playback is always better than 'equal' streamed playback.  

I tried to isolate all the variables in equipment and playback and always got the same result.  Then I bought a Marantz ND8006 - and the same is true.  You may know that with this unit, as a CD and network player, the DAC is the same onboard.  But when I playback a CD against the same version of a song from Tidal or Amazon HD the CD always wins, better top end, more 'air', better imaging, timing etc. You may say that Tidal and Amazon HD are not actually CD quality - but they are pretty pretty pretty close.  Still the CD playback is easily distinguishable - and since it is all playing from the same unit it eliminates potential for other variables to influence the outcome (different cables etc).  Maybe there is still a clocking/jitter difference between the CD output to the DAC and the streamed signal to the DAC - but it seems not very likely.  

I have not yet compared it with a downloaded FLAC or other high res file but I wouldn't be surprised to still find for some strange reason the CD still sounding better again even on a unit like the Marantz ND8006  - bits are not just bits for whatever reason.  I don't get it.