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
antigrunge2
1,451 posts
 

This thread started in the right place: clean power and optimal clocking are the most important ingredients of a good system.

Clocking unfortunately comes in various flavours: incoming signal, whether ethernet or fibre, streamer output to DDC or DAC, D/A conversion. In particular it matters whether the DAC slaves the streamer (USB) or reclicks the streamer output (I2S, AES/EBU SPDIF, Optical, BNC). In my experience outside topshelf offerings from e.g MSB, WADAX, etc, clocks in most components are not at the same level as good 10m master clocks because building a $3-10K clock into a streamer or DAC simply isn’t economically viable and additionally full synchronisation between various components can unlock additional benefits.

In terms of power supplies Farad, Paul Hynes and Sean Jacobs seem to have built a fine niche supplying high end dacs and streamers from different manufacturers albeit sometimes requiring major surgery on the component being upgraded.

All this goes to show that the lack of specific recommendatiins on this thread has multiple causes before you even start getting into cables, filters and active decrapifiers.

So unless you pay up for absolute top components, it’ll be trial and error before one arrives at a satisfactory SQ

thatkenziegirl
5 posts
 

Interesting discussion with many POV's. I'm still kinda new to the streaming world so what I have to say is based on my years purchasing and upgrading all nilly-willy. You have to take into account the overall quality of the system you have or you are striving towards. I've owned crappy systems, good systems and I think now I own the best I can afford. Having an excellent lets say CD player that plays into a crappy pre-amp that then feeds into an excellent power amp and you will get crappy sound because of, as one person has said here, there is the weak link in the chain. In this case the pre-amp. You have to look at the entirety of the system. To do any other way would bring disaster, meaning a waste of money and auditory pain. As far as the difference between various connections it becomes a matter of what you have and in the end what sounds best to you. I like the sound of tubes even though I'm aware of their constraints and how they color the final sound produced, but they sound right for MY ears. You do get what you pay for in general, but not always. You have to take into account that there is marketing involved and their job is to make you believe that you will get the newest and bestest whiz-bang for your system. In this case be wary and do your research and listen with your ears.

mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
676 posts
 

@thatkenziegirl 

 In this case be wary and do your research and listen with your ears.

Yes, half of us keep saying this and the other half clearly do not. They instead "decide" what will sound best, or what will not sound better. 

Seems really odd in a "sense-based" hobby that one refuses to use their senses.

Imagine someone calling themselves an artist yet refusing to look at the painting. 

mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
676 posts
 

@antigrunge2 +1

clean power and optimal clocking are the most important ingredients of a good system.

No surprise a company like Grimm that engineers its own clocks for others and who developed their own power supply tends to have nice sounding streamers.

All this goes to show that the lack of specific recommendatiins on this thread has multiple causes before you even start getting into cables, filters and active decrapifiers.

So unless you pay up for absolute top components, it’ll be trial and error before one arrives at a satisfactory SQ

And as a result it is reported the Grimm machines do not improve substantially with cable and filter changes as much as other streamers can.

antigrunge2
1,451 posts
 

@mclinnguy

While I agree with Grimm design principles I don‘t believe that Roon is the best sounding software. Certainly in my comparison on InnuOS Zenith Mk3 InnuOS Sense 3.1. beat it hands down. That said, an integrated server/DAC/Preamp seems to allow for simultaneous clocking of in/output and analog conversion while obviating cable interferences,coloration, and long transmission paths between stages.

More specifically Roon‘s software is substantially more processing intensive than Sense, which is a function of allowing renderer and server separation, more soohisticated library management and DSP plug-ins. This in turn requires more high powered processors which generate more heat and noise through larger PSUs

More to discover