Importance of a DAC's elements

The DAC design that has the most variability is the FPGA type, since it is software based. My plan is to get one of those in a few years. I use a Schitt Yggi+ LIM today. It punches way above its’ price. You will hear that statement from a lot of people on other DACs.😀

In terms of inputs any Ethernet input (RJ45) in a DAC is only used by me for short term convenience situations. When you connect an Ethernet cable to a DAC, any noise on a network, printers, computers, home security, etc.. is now allowed to go into your DAC via the RJ45 connection.

A streamer that cleans that up is what I do before I go into a DAC. I like to clean up the network using a fibre optic (glass) cable just before a DAC. I use Sonore Optical Rendu that take fibre as input and outputs USB which can then goes into the DAC. Fibre cannot carry analog noise because it is made of glass.

This is not a perfectly pure solution because of that last conversion. A pure solution is to use a DAC with a fibre optica input, such as the Lumin X1 or a Linn DAC (forgot model).

The Sonore OpticalRendu and the Lumin X1 (both a streamwe and DAC) are ROON READY. I use ROON in multiple systems in various rooms. My ROON Core server that manages the streaming is on a computer hidden under a bed in my guest bedroom. It has no monitor, keyboard, or mouse. The computer cost $500 and it pretty junkie. However, it does not matter because I use fibre optic in the last few feet before the DAC.

DACs have one function, to convert the digital streams of ones and zeros into analog sound. It is why they are called Digital to Analog Converter.

Streamers, renders, etc are sources , that get the digits from somewhere, and then feed it to a DAC. They may or may not contain the DAC within, much as a CD player combines a transport to read the digits and a DAC to turn it into sound.

The question the OP is posing is whether it is better to combine the source with the DAC.

Personally I favor keeping them separate. DACs have different philosophies (architectures) as to how to do their job, and the OP identifies a few. It’s easier to try different DACs and judge their differences if one keeps the source constant, and the same is true with judging differences in sources

@ danager

The Auralic streamers have the Amazon Music connections built into their Lightning software. I use it all the time.

I have a decent handle on the relative merits of various engines (e.g., single-chip ESS devices, FPGAs, R2R ladders, ring, etc.) so I don't need feed back on that topic. However, let's take the "streamer/renderer". Is there any benefit from that function being a separate component versus being a board inside?

just convenience, and form factor

What are the most important considerations in evaluating them?

quality of sound, ergonomics, flexibility of use (sources) and connectivity

Currently, standalone streamer/renderers cost from under $2,000 to nearly $15,000. What do the higher priced units offer that the lower priced ones do not?

usually (but not always) better in the above mentioned aspects

Also, I can appreciate that the analog output function of a DAC is extremely important in determining the quality of the outgoing analog signal. What makes one analog output better than another?

quality and thoughtfulness of implementation (design, parts quality, voicing)

What should I be looking for to ensure that this output doesn't undercut the quality of the conversion done by the DAC itself?

read reviews (formal and informal) to cull candidates, buy and try at some length, choose ultimately based on your own experience not what others say

DAC stands for digital audio converter. Nothing about streaming. Go fish.