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
mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
563 posts
 

Some would say... buy a Lexus and be happy with your journey

Others would say... why buy the Lexus when you can save money and buy a Kia Soul,... after all you are just going from point A to B

Others would say... why buy the Kia when you could buy a bicycle and get there much cheaper and you might be healthier.

To each his own and be happy.

Good analogy @2psyop Exactly. Nobody goes to the Lexus forums and calls them all "luxury-fools" for spending there money this way, but plenty do this on audio forums. 

sns
3,318 posts
 

Whatever interface one uses they all can be less or more depending on one's optimization. While I2S has some inherent advantages that doesn't mean it will always sound better than usb  or whatever. Clocking and power supplies to the clocks is of utmost importance.. Three categories of clocks, femto, txco, oxco, in theory the order of quality least to most is femto, txco, oxco. In reality a well implemented femto clock could outperform a less well implemented oxco clock. The quality of the clock itself and more importantly the quality of the power supply to that clock matters a lot.

 

The above holds true whether comparing I2S implementations or comparing usb vs I2S implementations. The most optimal implementation for either of these interfaces would be a well implemented oxco clock in both streamer and dac. Good luck trying to find that in either streamers or dacs. space limitations for the power supply alone make it very difficult to implement. Femto clocks are easiest to implement with these space limitations, cost considerations probably play a role as well.

 

So, wide variability in clocks and interfaces and we haven't even gotten to differences in motherboards, processors, RAM, operating systems, linear power supplies, music player apps. All have a bearing on sound quality.

 

And then we haven't even gotten to differences in optical vs ethernet, switches vs routers, digital cables, modems, linear power supplies to all these devices, and I may be forgetting some things.

 

Some believe you can just slap in any streamer and get the same quality of sound with a fully optimized streaming setup. I and many others have experienced otherwise so believe whatever you want to believe.

soix
9,672 posts
 

From Antipodes: 

"a clock stage is only as good as the circuit it is used in and the power supply that powers the circuit. And the re-clocking stage needs to receive a low-noise signal with high-bandwidth, before it can re-clock the signal accurately. If the signals before and after the re-clocking stage are polluted by noise below the bit-rate (such as from employing linear power supplies) then the re-clocking will be largely ineffective. Anyone that claims that digital is 'just ones and zeroes' has not applied their knowledge to demanding real-world problems."

All the best super-expensive, no compromise streamers have gone to huge lengths to develop their power supplies, which is a large portion of their expense. 

@russbutton  I’d encourage you to at least demo a decent streamer from a place like Crutchfield, Amazon, etc. that allows for returns rather than blindly holding on to the belief that it’s all just ones and zeros.  Hundreds of us here have found that’s absolutely not the case for audio — not even close, so unless we’re all somehow wrong and fooling ourselves it’d be worth your while to at least try. 

devinplombier
220 posts
 

there is a reason why people buy a $7000 Sean Jacobs power supply for their Chord Dave.

Yep

mdalton's avatar
mdalton
486 posts
 

To the OP:  Your emphasis on the clock is a mistake, imho.  The impact on sound from a quality clock/reclocking is easily measured (jitter).  The only source I know of that consistently measures jitter in streamers is HiFi News.  So I put together a small database of 13 streamers measured by HiFi News over the last few years; the two streamers costing £1k or less have jitter levels at about the same levels as the 11 higher cost streamers (up to £33k), and these are vanishingly low levels of jitter.

So that leaves only one other area of potential difference among streamers:  power supply-related noise.  And as some others have mentioned, DACs vary widely with respect to their sensitivity to noise; some are largely immune.  Unfortunately, HiFi News measurements of this - thru signal-to-noise ratios - is less comprehensive.  However, what measurements they have done on this issue suggest, again, that you don’t need to spend a lot of coin on a streamer.  There are well-engineered noise-free streamers available for £1k or less.

Finally, my own experience of streamers over the last 20 years, including a fair number of direct A/B comparisons, has confirmed what the data show.  Isn’t it great when the science and our experience are consistent?

More to discover