advertisement


Does a streamer sound better than a CD player?

I’m pretty sure a melco N1zh S100 Linn klimax DS outperforms any CD player so ultimately streaming wins albeit at a fairly hefty cost.
 
Last edited:
killie99 said:
Strangely I know someone who never goes to see live music as they don’t like how it sounds!
Click to expand...
I share that feeling. Particularly unamplified acoustic instruments do not sound analog enough.

I once tried this at the opera, watching Die Meistersinger. I closed my eyes and imagined I am listening to my hifi. Alas, the sound was very shouty and edgy. Bass was muddy and indistinct. No soundstage to speak of, no silky smooth treble, inky blacks or prat.
 
Octavian said:
I share that feeling. Particularly unamplified acoustic instruments do not sound analog enough.

I once tried this at the opera, watching Die Meistersinger. I closed my eyes and imagined I am listening to my hifi. Alas, the sound was very shouty and edgy. Bass was muddy and indistinct. No soundstage to speak of, no silky smooth treble, inky blacks or prat.
Click to expand...
I recognize concert halls like that. But I wouldn't stop going to concerts when I can.

Thinking about the question posed, I think there's no definitive answer. It depends on what "better" means in the context of an individual's goals in pursuing a hobby. And that means it's a good question to provoke discussion.

In my system both solutions sound good enough for me to listen to the music without experiencing any distractions coming from the equipment. My view (of any equipment comparison) is that once the kit is good enough to get out of the way of my enjoyment of the music, comparison becomes moot. I like good kit but I like good music more. I know that "good enough" is not a part of how others enjoy the hobby and that's fair enough. Maybe my philosophy makes me a bad audiophile. I'm OK with that.
 
John Phillips said:
I recognize concert halls like that. But I wouldn't stop going to concerts when I can.

Thinking about the question posed, I think there's no definitive answer. It depends on what "better" means in the context of an individual's goals in pursuing a hobby. And that means it's a good question to provoke discussion.

In my system both solutions sound good enough for me to listen to the music without experiencing any distractions coming from the equipment. My view (of any equipment comparison) is that once the kit is good enough to get out of the way of my enjoyment of the music, comparison becomes moot. I like good kit but I like good music more. I know that "good enough" is not a part of how others enjoy the hobby and that's fair enough. Maybe my philosophy makes me a bad audiophile. I'm OK with that.
Click to expand...
I like that philosophy. I’m the same. I focus on the music first. If the equipment conveys and communicates the performance well, that’s success. I’m not really into ‘better’. My sources are good enough. If I am fussing about the equipment it just distracts me.When the equipment isn’t conveying the performance effectively it’s usually because I am not in the mood, distractions are impinging or the mastering isn’t up to scratch. It’s also about my focus. If I’m open and in the mood and distractions are at a minimum then the whole experience can gel and become something very special.
 
In the past I fell into the upgrade urge. It’s an addiction that means you’re never satisfied with what you have. I forced myself to stop and reflect, to stay with what I had to have time to appreciate what it did well. This was difficult at first but gradually the urges ebbed away and I did appreciate what I had. Once you’ve done this, the music takes precedence again which can’t be a bad thing. It made me listen more intently and be more selective with the music I listened to.
 
Another disadvantage of a cd player is that it won't give you internet radio.

I am more than happy with a streamer a ripper and a turntable, but then I never liked the cd medium because of the small cover art.
 
david ellwood said:
You make is sound like CD offers perfect sound, I’ll be impressed when digital starts to make drums that sound like drums.
Click to expand...
In what way David? Could you please give a clear example I could stream to listen to? Im interested.
 
Del monaco said:
In the past I fell into the upgrade urge. It’s an addiction that means you’re never satisfied with what you have. I forced myself to stop and reflect, to stay with what I had to have time to appreciate what it did well. This was difficult at first but gradually the urges ebbed away and I did appreciate what I had. Once you’ve done this, the music takes precedence again which can’t be a bad thing. It made me listen more intently and be more selective with the music I listened to.
Click to expand...
Yes. I do think, as you write, that people may need to go through the phase of finding their own limits starting with the "everything audio matters" hypothesis but an open mind. If someone chooses to change from "everything audio matters" to "this is my list of audio things that matter" then it can change the way they enjoy music. If not then fair enough.

At least for me, audio still matters a lot. It's just that I understand better now what specifically matters and how much, relative to the music.
 
It all gets a bit silly. There are no absolutes here. My local streaming is marginally better than my CDP was. Depending on your setup that may not be true for you. My Qobuz quality matches my local streams to a surprising extent. Your mileage may vary. Some people will read my statements and say they can’t possibly be true because either they don’t want them to be; want to have an argument on the internet or it doesn’t fit with their belief system. Both statements will nevertheless remain true for me and no amount of counter argument will diminish the reality that my system for me leaves me listening for 4 to 5 hours at a time whoever I can with no fatigue whatsoever.

I did love the earlier post about CD being more corporeal compared to streaming. Exactly the same argument used by advocates of vinyl/analogue over CD. Exactly the same argument used by people who add power supplies or reclockers or different DACs or different cables.

Essentially each of us has done “something” to move our system towards where we want it to be. The fact it worked for us does not make it an absolute x is better than y. It’s a common mistake.
 
So my findings came about as I was comparing two DAC’s (both within the £1000 ball park), I wanted to really put them through the wringer as I intend to buy the victor and keep it for a significant term.

I signed up to Tidal, Qobuz, Apple & Amazon as well as Roon & Audirvāna. Oh, and Bandcamp.


I discovered a few things whilst listening:

- two comparably similar DAC’s can have a very different presentation in respect of imaging, soundstage and impact.

- Not all streaming platforms are equal.

- MQA appears to not be worth the pixels it’s branded with.

- Transport, compression, bandwidth contention, packet shaping and other factors all can degrade content.

- Apple are up to something far bigger that will probably render other platforms irrelevant to most users of the other streaming services.

- The missis is unlikely to ever assist in anymore long term blind testing experiments.

- CD sounds better than 90% of streamed content.

- PCM (etc) figures are only indicative of the original/upsampled rates and not the quality.


In short:


Qobuz sounded the best out of the streaming services tested.

Apple came second, more on this in a bit.*

Tidal were not a close third as their was audibly roll off of both hi & low.

Amazon we’re about the same as Tidal.

CD sounded better than those listed above. This was through the same DAC’s using quality cables and a Pioneer PD-9700, with the analogue disabled, as transport.
  • what are apple up to? Essentially I’d describe it as “mastering on the fly” their audio processing capabilities are such that they can not only identify voices, instruments & artefacts but also live render a mix into Atmos (or other) presentation. This will ultimately mean that your average headphone users will be treated to far more dynamic sound staging and effects than if they were using a streaming service that presents content as it was mixed. No doubt they’ll also roll out options to configure your mix to stereo, tv, etc. This will undoubtedly have a significant “wow factor” and undoubtedly prompt a greater uptake of the Apple services. It’s also likely to sound the death of MQA.

So why do CD’s sound better?

Essentially streaming is subject to compression which despite claims to the contrary do impact on file quality, even FLAC.

If you want to listen to the music as it’s come from the desk then your best option is to buy the .WAV files from Bandcamp (or similar). Yes archiving is not particularly convenient but I’m afraid that’s the hairshirt you’re going to have to wear if you want actual lossless digital media. And yes that can sound better than CD.

And after all that what did I go and do? Bought my preferred DAC.

oh and then I bought a record player.
 
As has been pointed out in a number of posts, if you're using a decent streamer and a decent CD transport into the same DAC then there should be little difference at the same price point: they're both basically transports. I'm sure "better" comes down more to listening preferences than actual "better"s in many instances.

Of course if "CD player" includes using its internal DAC, then you're really comparing DACs not transports vs streamer.

I now use a good quality transport and my "pimped Node 2i streamer (it has a linear PSU) into the same DAC. There are differences in the sound, but I wouldn't say one is universally better than the other; they both sound fab and both serve different, if overlapping, purposes.

I'm not sure I know anyone who in the real world has been forced to choose between CD and streaming, so it's all a bit theoretical anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top