2. digital
  3. 192710-196145

ARE SUPER EXPENSIVE STREAMERS REALLY WORTH IT

Folks I am confused why some streamers need to be so eye wateringly expensive. I appreciate the internal basics need to be covered such as a high quality, low noise power supply and a decent processor speed etc..  but that is not rocket science.

So my question is could a decent streamer outputting its data stream via I2S to a good quality DAC receiving the I2S stream be a more cost effective way of rivalling let’s say a streamer costing 5k upwards.

I have heard and digested the argument for expensive streamers quality being centred around the management of the data timing via a quality clock circuit but there are very reasonable in relative terms, DAC’s out there that have dual super high quality temp controlled clocks within, at least the equal or arguably even better than the say a 5k streamer with some sporting dual high end DAC chips etc.

So could utilizing a good quality streamer and a separate high-quality DAC connected via I2S indeed offer significant benefits and potentially reduce the need for a very expensive streamer.

I say this with the knowledge that I2S is designed to preserve and separate the Signals so avoiding the timing issues connected with multiplexing. I2S (Inter-IC Sound) separates the music signal from the timing signal, potentially eliminating jitter or at the very least greatly reducing the possibility for the pesky music killing jitter which we all could agree would lead to improving overall sound quality.

Wouldn’t this separation ensure that the timing information is more accurately preserved, even when compared to a high price streamer, leading as clean or cleaner and more precise audio data output. With I2S, the DAC can use its own high-quality clock/s to synchronize the data, which will reduce jitter and improve sound quality.

Could this possibly mean that even if the streamer has a less advanced clock, the DAC’s superior clock can take over, ensuring best  performance.

So bang for buck would it not be advantageous to investing in a high-quality DAC and using a good but not necessarily top-tier streamer to achieve excellent sound quality without the need for an extremely expensive streamer. Surely the DAC’s performance will play a crucial role in the final sound quality.

Play gentle with the pile on please....................

nubiann
big_greg
6,660 posts
 

The DAC and what it does to produce the analog signal that is sent to your speakers is the most important part of your digital chain. i2s vs. USB vs. coax, etc., R2R vs.FPGA, etc. matter less than the implementation of the conversion to analog.

To provide some real life examples...

When I upgraded from a Roon Nucleus to a Rockna Wavedream Net server, I heard very little if any in sound quality.  

When I added a HDMI it i2s converter to my Oppo 203 to send the DSD signal from SACDs and also Redbook CDs to my Rockna DAC, instead of using the DAC in the Oppo, there was a significant improvement in sound quality and musical enjoyment. 

Moving from a TEAC streamer to a Roon Nucleus/Aqua La Voce S3 resulted in a significant increase in sound quality.

Moving from that to Roon Nucleus/Rockna Wavedream Signature DAC resulted in a significant increase in sound quality.

Moving from the Roon Nucleus to the Rockna Wavedream Server, almost no difference.

It all matters, but 90% or more of the magic happens in the DAC, that's where I recommend making the biggest investment in your digital chain.

roadcykler
158 posts
 

If you believe that more expensive = better by default, you've already succumbed to the fallacy of "you get what you pay for." 

larry5729's avatar
larry5729
1,009 posts
 

I wonder if this has been blind test?  Could it be if you spend $10,000 you automatically are hearing a significant difference?  Are we splitting hairs or is it worth the money.  I don’t have knowledge this group has that is for sure.

soix
9,667 posts
 

If a decent but not considered high end streamer ouputs via I2S and is connected to an accepted excellent DAC which accepts I2S, is then compared to a top end streamer connected to the same DAC but via USB lets say. Is the outcome a slam dunk to the expensive streamer. I understood that I2S properly implemented all but elliminates the possiblity of timing errors, so if as is being said the whole raison d’etre of high end streamers is to provide a clean signal to the DAC so it doesnt have to work as hard and this results in a better audio signal, I2S should win this contest or?

I would expect a better streamer using a non-i2S connection to sound better than a cheaper streamer using i2S because there’s a lot more to it than just the connection type. I don’t think i2S has as much to do with timing but more to do with the DAC not having to unpack the clocks/data from the combined signal transmitted by other connection types, but I guess timing could be tied into that somehow but I don’t know. Mojo Audio brings up a good point that any i2S cable should be as short as possible (1 foot or less is preferable) because the signal will degrade rapidly with cable length potentially overriding the benefits of i2S, and it also depends greatly on which input(s) the DAC designer put the most effort into sounding best so there are significant variables here and trial and error may be your best option here (unless the DAC designer says one particular input is preferable and then probably best to just go with that). That said, i2S seems less sensitive to cable quality than usual, and I use this cheap 12” HDMI cable from Monoprice and am getting excellent results. I’ll try a better HDMI cable (probably from DH Labs) at some point just out of curiosity, but my results are so good as is I’m not in any rush.

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=24187

The bottom line is there are many variables when it comes to DAC performance and connection type is only one. Personally I’d take a better DAC that has optimized a given input over a lesser DAC with i2S, but in my case my R2R DAC only cost $1100 and maybe that’s why i2S was better than the other inputs. I don’t know but am just following what my ears are telling me, and since almost every situation — between individual tastes/preferences and differences in equipment design — is different, following your ears as usual should be the final arbiter.

wsrrsw's avatar
wsrrsw
1,054 posts
 

 

@nubiann Let's try this a different way. The only base caveat being is that the room and equipment need to be all that or close enough.

Many have done this. I did. 

1.) Mac book or Computer w/ generic wire into AMP or integrated.

2.) BlueSound w/ generic wire into AMP or integrated.

3.) BlueSound w/ generic wire into AMP or integrated with upgraded power supply and wire

3.A) Better wire

4.) All in one Streamer/DAC ($) into.....

5.) Better ($$) Streamer/DAC or separates and DAC into ....

6.) Filtered ethernet(Network Acoustics or the like) and audio or enterprise switch with very good wire/connects

7.) Better Streamer/DAC ($$$) or separates and DAC into...

8.) All the bells and whistles ($$$$) for a bit more nuance. Only for the best of the best resolving systems.

So yes, OP as long as the everything's jake, then a top tier streamer and great DAC or a super duper all in one is copacetic.

Chasing down how to get amazing sounding "digital" has a leaning curve and thanks to many here on Agon who are far more knowable than little 'ole me; I believe I now have a digital system that allows hours of pleasure with no fatigue. Got to go....time for my sound bath.

 

More to discover