advertisement


Streaming transports SQ differences?

mjwolf said:
I think what we're seeing here is another victim of our post-truth age, tired of listening to so-called experts like scientists and engineers. I bet he voted for Trump and Brexit, no doubt influenced by Russian Twitter bots and Hi-Fi media's anti-Chi-Fi propaganda.
Click to expand...

12774-TinFoilHat-May-Move02_800x.gif
 
I have been tinkering with computer audio for 11 years.

I have tried the same source material rip rate and same mastering, streamed from PC based HDD,ripped to nas, several generations of LMS SBT, sonos, plus several SW based transports on iPad and pc (ipeng, roon, Squeezepad, Squeezeplay. I'm quite techy so I can concurrently link source 'transports - all into same DAC Benchmark HDR and flip source to source on the fly. I really cannot hear a difference on 16 bit FLACs.

Maybe my ears would be opened if I auditioned a 'high' end box into same DAC. But I am sceptical.

For anyone who runs music across a network and who knows anything about Ethernet packets, they will also know that it is impossible for 'noise' to be digitized, packed and represented in any Ethernet data packet, transmitted across networks, and then unpacked, packet-verified, then finally translated into incremental audio noise that the listener could hear. It simply does not work like that.

To each his own, but I really don't care what happens before the DAC when it comes to computer based music
 
guest said:
I have been tinkering with computer audio for 11 years.

I have tried the same source material rip rate and same mastering, streamed from PC based HDD,ripped to nas, several generations of LMS SBT, sonos, plus several SW based transports on iPad and pc (ipeng, roon, Squeezepad, Squeezeplay. I'm quite techy so I can concurrently link source 'transports - all into same DAC Benchmark HDR and flip source to source on the fly. I really cannot hear a difference on 16 bit FLACs.

Maybe my ears would be opened if I auditioned a 'high' end box into same DAC. But I am sceptical.

For anyone who runs music across a network and who knows anything about Ethernet packets, they will also know that it is impossible for 'noise' to be digitized, packed and represented in any Ethernet data packet, transmitted across networks, and then unpacked, packet-verified, then finally translated into incremental audio noise that the listener could hear. It simply does not work like that.

To each his own, but I really don't care what happens before the DAC when it comes to computer based music
Click to expand...

To hear the magic, first you have to believe in the magic. Faith-based audio 101. You must not have tried to believe hard enough. Perhaps The Chronicals can offer some tips.
 
mjwolf said:
To hear the magic, first you have to believe in the magic. Faith-based audio 101. You must not have tried to believe hard enough. Perhaps The Chronicals can offer some tips.
Click to expand...

Lol. Non-believer here. I am in the Good Enough Club!
 
guest said:
For anyone who runs music across a network and who knows anything about Ethernet packets, they will also know that it is impossible for 'noise' to be digitized, packed and represented in any Ethernet data packet, transmitted across networks, and then unpacked, packet-verified, then finally translated into incremental audio noise that the listener could hear. It simply does not work like that.
Click to expand...

Noise absolutely can be and is digitised, packetised and sent over Ethernet networks. I think what you mean to say is that the process of moving it across an Ethernet network does not add noise. Remember also that sending digital audio from a streamer to a DAC is very different from sending it from a NAS or streaming service to a streamer.
 
Strictly Stereo said:
I think what you mean to say is that the process of moving it across an Ethernet network does not add noise. Remember also that sending digital audio from a streamer to a DAC is very different from sending it from a NAS or streaming service to a streamer.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but neither adds noise to, or changes, the audio data in any way.
 
I moved from Naim to a more modestly priced system, forced by a need for money. After the initial ‘ How am I going to ever get anything like that again?’ I began to realise I wasn’t missing the gear. I was more excited to be negotiating new waters and was very glad I did. It was like when I first got into HiFi and bought second hand gear. I also realised that CA was a much less commercialised area at the time you could put together a good sounding streaming system for really very little money. And the bonus was it sounded great and connected you. It also got away from the dreaded Upgraditis that I would have inevitably been pulled towards. There’s so much great second hand stuff and CA based gear out there that HiFi has become fun again. I have listened to some good mega expensive gear but I’m just no longer interested in that kind of aspiration anymore.
 
Strictly Stereo said:
It can do, if the timing of the data is not sufficiently precise, but that leads us neatly back to the "all competently designed DACs sound the same" argument.
Click to expand...

Yes, in extreme cases you do indeed get transmission/data errors, but I don't think that is what we are discussing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top