advertisement


Switching from hard media to streaming

AndyU said:
1. I don’t believe any errors creep in between a streamer and a DAC. Several DACs allow you to run a bit perfect test; when I had one I could prove that what was sent from my hard drive was received. The bit error rate at the physical level for USB is 1 in 10^12. Nearly never. And that’s before error correction.

2. The DAC used in cutting an acetate from a digital master will also suffer from jitter and noise, all you need at home is a DAC at least as good and you will get analogue at least as good as what could have been fed to the cutting lathe. You choice is

digital master -> D to A conversion -> your preamp/hifi
digital master -> D to A conversion -> cutting head -> acetate -> plating -> stamper -> pressing -> cartridge -> your preamp/hifi

Unless you think that disc cutting somehow improves a signal, I just can’t see how the analogue chain can be better. It is just a source of noise and distortion.
Click to expand...
I agree but would add that I don’t think humans necessarily like perfection or, as few things are perfect, near perfection. If people prefer the idiosyncrasies of vinyl and that helps them better comprehend the music than that is better for them. It certainly isn’t for me but then I mostly listen to classical. I have found over the years that digital got very close to being just right but there was still something that sounded not quite right. Rob Watts developments have, for me, eliminated the “not quite right” to a sound that is sufficiently good that I no longer listen to the sound so much as the music - and that really does improve the music!

There is something to be said for overengineering at all stages including the streamer but I wonder if the gains of having a very expensive streamer diminish, possibly to nothing, when fed into a very good DAC. When it comes to playing my own ripped files the user interface is very important and I have yet to come across anything that compares with JRemote on a tablet linked to JRiver which can be configured exactly I like. As such it would need a very large gain in sound quality (which seems unlikely) to lure me away from a MacMini.
 
camverton said:
I agree but would add that I don’t think humans necessarily like perfection or, as few things are perfect, near perfection. If people prefer the idiosyncrasies of vinyl and that helps them better comprehend the music than that is better for them. It certainly isn’t for me but then I mostly listen to classical. I have found over the years that digital got very close to being just right but there was still something that sounded not quite right. Rob Watts developments have, for me, eliminated the “not quite right” to a sound that is sufficiently good that I no longer listen to the sound so much as the music - and that really does improve the music!

There is something to be said for overengineering at all stages including the streamer but I wonder if the gains of having a very expensive streamer diminish, possibly to nothing, when fed into a very good DAC. When it comes to playing my own ripped files the user interface is very important and I have yet to come across anything that compares with JRemote on a tablet linked to JRiver which can be configured exactly I like. As such it would need a very large gain in sound quality (which seems unlikely) to lure me away from a MacMini.
Click to expand...

That, like several of the comments here, makes perfectly good sense to me. Perhaps the issue making this discussion non-trivial is that some imperfections matter more than others to the listening exprience.

I had firm expectations for what the results would be before we did the tests, and was a bit miffed by the results (see above). At the risk of causing annoyance, can I suggest that you try options that don't involve a Mac? If all that happens is that what you actually hear in a proper blind test supports your existing view, no harm done.

Having had my expectations confounded, I now quite enjoy watching others (who are honest enough to admit what they hear) going through the same process. Mind you, I am so old I remember the ads claiming that any CD offered "perfect sound forever" and Tomorrow's World 'proving' it, and Sony arguing that all CD players would sound the same unless they were actually incompetently designed, so perhaps I should have known better.
 
NickofWimbledon said:
That, like several of the comments here, makes perfectly good sense to me. Perhaps the issue making this discussion non-trivial is that some imperfections matter more than others to the listening exprience.

I had firm expectations for what the results would be before we did the tests, and was a bit miffed by the results (see above). At the risk of causing annoyance, can I suggest that you try options that don't involve a Mac? If all that happens is that what you actually hear in a proper blind test supports your existing view, no harm done.

Having had my expectations confounded, I now quite enjoy watching others (who are honest enough to admit what they hear) going through the same process. Mind you, I am so old I remember the ads claiming that any CD offered "perfect sound forever" and Tomorrow's World 'proving' it, and Sony arguing that all CD players would sound the same unless they were actually incompetently designed, so perhaps I should have known better.
Click to expand...
You’re not causing annoyance at all! As I said the user interface is important to me so until someone comes up with an app that has the browsing versatility of JRiver There is not much point in finding hardware which may well sound a tad better and then not using it because of the interface - there lies the route to frustration! It has to be said that I am very happy with the sound I have and not in need of chasing any more dragons. As it happens I convert USB from the MAC to optical into an mscaler, this being because the mscaler had a problem locking on to the MAC. I did compare the USB direct versus optical and preferred the optical but there was hardly anything in it.

As for vinyl, I long ditched it because I mostly listen to classical music. I well remember the trips back and forth to the shop trying to get a not too bad pressing, and even then a format where you have to change sides in the middle of a movement is not conducive to enjoying the music, and that’s before being distracted by surface noise, depressions, clicks and end of side distortion just when classical music often gets loudest.
 
NickofWimbledon said:
On many more albums, the LP12 won - more pace, more stereo separation
Click to expand...

That is just utterly, totally, ridiculous. A really good cartridge has maybe crosstalk of 35dB at 1kHz, which gets worse either side of that. A DAC like a Benchmark DAC3 has crosstalk of 130dB at 1kHz, even better at 20Hz and not much worse - still 116dB - at 20kHz. The DAC is many, many more times better at stereo separation.
 
I don't think there can be much argument about good digital being in most respects technically superior to good vinyl/record playback. Even starting to debate this is ludicrous.

How individuals interpret/feel about this is another story altogether and has probably as much to do with hanging on to ritual and 'good' old times as it has with evidence that a certain amount of distortion/homogeneous playback (lack of separation together with higher noise floor) can be entirely desirable ... for some.

In similar vain, some like a healthy dose of Xfeed in headphones. Others don't.

What I find fascinating though is how some spend thousands, in certain instances tens of thousands to make a technically inferior source sound more like digital.
 
AndyU said:
That is just utterly, totally, ridiculous. A really good cartridge has maybe crosstalk of 35dB at 1kHz, which gets worse either side of that. A DAC like a Benchmark DAC3 has crosstalk of 130dB at 1kHz, even better at 20Hz and not much worse - still 116dB - at 20kHz. The DAC is many, many more times better at stereo separation.
Click to expand...

I am sure I won't die from being called ridiculous or ludicrous, or indeed deaf, daft or dishonest. I also remain in favour of people enjoying their music however works best for them.

I will also readily admit to being a poor and easily swayed listener, and one that gets deafer every year. This is after all why I have often roped in better listeners and asked for their input on blind listening tests. I have also learned that I will usually agree with them eventually, whether I do so immediately or not.

Given all that, when we get consistent and repeated results saying that (say) a particular version of Kind of Blue on Qobuz sounds better (more involving, better separation of instruments, cleaner and more controlled bass, more ability to hear what is being done on the high hat and so on), I am willing to assume that it is probably caused by something in the actual reproduction. I am not too surprised to find that listeners several years ago with different hifi boxes whom I have never met concluded the same, and don't assume it must be a bizarre coincidence or a deliberate deception.

When a hardcore CD-supporting conductor in a blind test agreed with our view that the CDs of The Trinity Session and Hot Rats were better than the Qobuz options, he was not surprised and neither was I. When it was then revealed that the version he had picked 'blind' with some consistency on a second run was the LP in both cases, he found it hilarious, but he stuck to what his ears had said. Mind you, the existence of annoying surface noise on most of my LPs explains why he will nevertheless never own a turntable again, even for those albums, and it is a perfectly good reason imho.

When listening to the LP of Three Jolly Butchers by Gryphon, the position of the bass voice (most obvious on the line 'A man of courage bold') far right is relevant. When listening to Steeleye Span singing The Weaver and the Factory Maid, the position of the second Maddy Prior voice on overdub is also relevant. If enough people all notice that version A makes these things clearer than version B, I don't assume a plot to deceive is involved.

Placing things clearly in the soundstage in examples like this is what I mean by stereo separation - if that is wrong and I should call it something else because of crosstalk numbers like the above, I am happy to be corrected and will use a different phrase that is a better description of the effect instead.

Many people appear quite wiling to accept the results of this sort of test as potentially useful when it refers to CD-playback versus rip versus Qobuz/ Tidal. Some of them can nevertheless be certain that we are all deceived, deaf, daft or dishonest (or more than one of the above) when using the same evidence for vinyl versus CD - except in cases (of which I own many) when the CD clearly wins (when the evidence from actually listening is quite good enough to be useful again). Curious?

In previous versions of that debate, I have suggested that people pop round for a future run of blind testing to see whether they consistently prefer CD to vinyl and/ or to streaming, and by a large margin, in the way that they suppose (and in some cases claim with great vigour). No one has yet been bothered to accept (perhaps they think I must be a serial killer?), but I realise that this is not evidence that they have changed their minds or that any evidence based on what they hear could ever lead them to do so. After all, as was explained to me in a previous run-through, human hearing is so poor that judging musical reproduction by how it sounds is arrogant nonsense.

More important, if we can't have a civilised exchange that mentions vinyl, perhaps it would be best if we all limit replies to this OP's question to those that refer only to digital formats
 
NickofWimbledon said:
In previous versions of that debate, I have suggested that people pop round for a future run of blind testing to see whether they consistently prefer CD to vinyl and/ or to streaming, and by a large margin, in the way that they suppose (and in some cases claim with great vigour). No one has yet been bothered to accept (perhaps they think I must be a serial killer?), but I realise that this is not evidence that they have changed their minds or that any evidence based on what they hear could ever lead them to do so. After all, as was explained to me in a previous run-through, human hearing is so poor that judging musical reproduction by how it sounds is arrogant nonsense.
Click to expand...

Would you pop round for a VHS vs Blu-ray run of blind testing?
I've had a movie director over who was rolling on the floor laughing when he learned he'd picked the ol' analogue tape.
 
Some very interesting comparisons here for sure. The last time I did any direct digital v analogue comparisons I was replaying Dire Straits "Telegraph Road" on the GyroDec SME IV v the Naim NDX. To be honest the Gyro was just a whole lot nicer to listen to at high levels in particular. Drums had more slam/weight, the vocals sounded more natural and most distinctively of all there was a tendency for the NDX to have a layer of 'hash/grain' that wasn't present from vinyl.

Now I think Telegraph Road was an analogue recording so I suppose the vinyl here has a natural advantage which could perhaps explain my observations. Quite a lot of the music I enjoy most was originally recorded on analogue tape e.g. Fleetwood Mac Rumours and other 60's 70's and 80's rock. I fully accept that with a modern digital recording a digital source may well sound more 'accurate' i.e. closer to the sound of the studio master.

Also if digital is the panacea some here say it is can somebody explain to me how come so many of the best sounding albums/tracks ever made from Brubeck's Take Five to Pink Floyd's the Final Cut were analogue recordings? You know that flawed medium with all its supposed limitations, distortions, generational degradations, limited dynamic range, crosstalk and all the rest! So then why is it that when you put on a copy of something recorded on 4 tracks on analogue tape in 1952 it blows you into the weeds? Next you put on some digital recording from 2023 whether it's Sam Fender or Billy EIlish or Taylor Swift or whoever and despite 70 years of development and all that 'pure perfect sound forever' technology it just sounds like shit... Personally I think anybody who generalises and says digital is just 'better' is rather oversimplifying here.
 
tuga said:
Would you pop round for a VHS vs Blu-ray run of blind testing?
I've had a movie director over who was rolling on the floor laughing when he learned he'd picked the ol' analogue tape.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting point.

First, I am probably as guilty as anyone of treating music differently. I fully accept that the best way to see most movies (and perhaps even some 30-minute TV shows) would be on a proper & full size cinema screen, but I don't do that. I don't even have a screen of the size of the mini screens in modern cinemas at home. How many of us do?

Second, I might take the VHS versus Blu Ray blind comparison seriously enough to try it if: -
Lots of people actually involved in producing films and TV advised me that VHS versions of some films and TV shows were actually better in specific ways
My own attempts at blind testing showed me and other people selecting VHS while thinking it was Blu ray
Several of the Blu Rays I bought were annoying enough to drive me back to my old VHS copies
Early Blu Rays were superseded quickly by multiple releases that apparently had all the appalling errors in the early ones cured
I kept meeting people working in or connected to the film & TV industry who still had a VHS player in their own homes
An extra bit of fidelity to the on-set/ on-stage experience from the screen helped me enjoy (say) Life of Brian, Citizen Kane, Some Like It Hot, The Misfits, The Producers, Forbidden Planet, The Blues Brothers, Rocky Horror Show or Apocalypse Now any more.

Would results on those points also make you reassess VHS?

More important, this OP asked about moving from hard media to streaming. If we can't have a sensible and respectful exchange that includes vinyl, why not restrict yourself to commenting on CD versus streaming, or do you believe that both always deliver 'perfect sound forever'?
 
Has Roon been mentioned? A superb App for anything streaming which makes the experience even better.

It includes DSP which allows to change sound for most fans of vinyl. The only thing missing is adding pops and crackles ;)
 
NickofWimbledon said:
It's an interesting point.

First, I am probably as guilty as anyone of treating music differently. I fully accept that the best way to see most movies (and perhaps even some 30-minute TV shows) would be on a proper & full size cinema screen, but I don't do that. I don't even have a screen of the size of the mini screens in modern cinemas at home. How many of us do?

Second, I might take the VHS versus Blu Ray blind comparison seriously enough to try it if: -
Lots of people actually involved in producing films and TV advised me that VHS versions of some films and TV shows were actually better in specific ways
My own attempts at blind testing showed me and other people selecting VHS while thinking it was Blu ray
Several of the Blu Rays I bought were annoying enough to drive me back to my old VHS copies
Early Blu Rays were superseded quickly by multiple releases that apparently had all the appalling errors in the early ones cured
I kept meeting people working in or connected to the film & TV industry who still had a VHS player in their own homes
An extra bit of fidelity to the on-set/ on-stage experience from the screen helped me enjoy (say) Life of Brian, Citizen Kane, Some Like It Hot, The Misfits, The Producers, Forbidden Planet, The Blues Brothers, Rocky Horror Show or Apocalypse Now any more.

Would results on those points also make you reassess VHS?

More important, this OP asked about moving from hard media to streaming. If we can't have a sensible and respectful exchange that includes vinyl, why not restrict yourself to commenting on CD versus streaming, or do you believe that both always deliver 'perfect sound forever'?
Click to expand...

The better-sounding support is a matter of personal preference, I agree with that.
But this topic is not about vinyl vs. digital, the OP is past that and wants help "switching from vinyl and CD systems to streamers".

We should indeed "have a sensible and respectful exchange that includes vinyl" (or anything else for that matter) but that is the subject of another topic.
 
It amazes me the range of prices people pay for streaming equipment.
I have a HP Microserver running Vortexbox (free download) incorporating LMS. I stream to a Pi 4 that USB connects to a £350 Project Pro S2 Digital (Sabre Chipset) DAC. It supports up to DSD 512 and PCM 32/768. The DAC is operated from a Linear Power Supply that I built from a £60 kit from ebay. I have a £30 used Cisco router dedicated between server and Streamers all hard wired. It's all controlled by Squeezer on my Phone.

The Material plugin gives me extensive detail on artists, album and even song lyrics. It sounds superb yet costs buttons.
I struggle to understand what extra people get from spending 10s of thousands on streaming equipment.
 
AndyU said:
That is just utterly, totally, ridiculous. A really good cartridge has maybe crosstalk of 35dB at 1kHz, which gets worse either side of that. A DAC like a Benchmark DAC3 has crosstalk of 130dB at 1kHz, even better at 20Hz and not much worse - still 116dB - at 20kHz. The DAC is many, many more times better at stereo separation.
Click to expand...

In theory I totally agree, but my observation having a pretty top notch vinyl and digital setup is that for whatever reason the vinyl does seem to convey depth and separation better. No idea why perhaps it's just the mastering?
 
RoA said:
Has Roon been mentioned? A superb App for anything streaming which makes the experience even better.

It includes DSP which allows to change sound for most fans of vinyl. The only thing missing is adding pops and crackles ;)
Click to expand...

As bridge-playing chums would say, "It's a view".

We can debate at length why we have reached different conclusions about the some examples of the physical media that the OP is giving up, but it is not exactly central to his question.

Oh and I too can remove all surface noise (even if pretending to wear a vinyl-only hat) by turning off the hi-fi and going to bed - but that too is hardly the point here.
 
I think my actual answer to the OP's actual question is that 5K-£10K of streaming kit does imho sound appreciably better than £500 of kit. However, I'd discourage spending more than perhaps £2K until you are very sure that this is a route for you and that you are actually 'hearing the difference' rather than hearing the hype. Does anyone think that too is ridiculous?
 
slavedata said:
It amazes me the range of prices people pay for streaming equipment.
I have a HP Microserver running Vortexbox (free download) incorporating LMS. I stream to a Pi 4 that USB connects to a £350 Project Pro S2 Digital (Sabre Chipset) DAC. It supports up to DSD 512 and PCM 32/768. The DAC is operated from a Linear Power Supply that I built from a £60 kit from ebay. I have a £30 used Cisco router dedicated between server and Streamers all hard wired. It's all controlled by Squeezer on my Phone.

The Material plugin gives me extensive detail on artists, album and even song lyrics. It sounds superb yet costs buttons.
I struggle to understand what extra people get from spending 10s of thousands on streaming equipment.
Click to expand...

Oh that's easy to explain. It SOUNDS BETTER. That's kind of the point of hifi - we're interested in building music replay systems that get us closer to the music, that evokes a deeper emotional response and enhances the enjoyment by virtue of fidelity. It's the same enjoyment as derived from seeing a Canaletto in real life versus a picture in a book - the book has the quality of verisimilitude, whereas the real thing has vibrancy, pop, presence and clarity that the book picture couldn't hope to replicate.

Of course, just as with poor eyesight, cheap equipment further down the music replay line will inhibit the ability of better source equipment to shine, so an expensive and highly revealing streamer will only be as good as the weakest link in the chain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top