Looking to upgrade my source

[CnoEvil]

Well the problem is what is the definition of streamer? Must it have a DAC? I think it should and in which case it's all about the quality of the analogue output stage. And in the case of lower resolution source up sampling ability. Matt can you bring that test forward 4 months?

As I have found out some do and some dont. I had similar thoughts , like if no DAC how can the streamer alone significantly alter the SQ. read so much over last week or so and the general impression I get is that it can..........just from what I have read

I like to think of it as, Streamers with DACs and Streamers without, rather than getting bogged down in semantics...what matters is the SQ.

I suspect there are inherent advantges by keeping control of the process, by having it in the one box. Areas which I believe effect sound quality are:

- Power supply. There was a noticeable improvement to the Linn DS range with the introduction of the Dynamik power supply.

- Clocking/Removal of jitter

- Sampling. Upsampling/Oversampling/No Sampling. Linn use their own custom-designed up-sampling engine.

- Isolation of internal components through internal layout /case design, which is particularly noticeable in the KDS.

 

[lindsayt]

I would be interested to hear a laptop or PC into a Benchmark DAC demo'd against Linn Klimax DS in the same system.

I've heard a Benchmark DAC into active ATC 50's sounding really good.

I've heard a Linn Klimax DS into Exakt active Linn 350's sounding really good.

I've heard a Linn Klimax DS into active Linn Majik Isobariks sounding not so good.

I've not heard a Benchmark DAC baked off against a Linn Klimax DS. I'd be interested in finding out if the Klimax DS sounds better, and if it's worth the £thousands extra.

 

[Womaz]

I would be interested to hear a laptop or PC into a Benchmark DAC demo'd against Linn Klimax DS in the same system.

I've heard a Benchmark DAC into active ATC 50's sounding really good.

I've heard a Linn Klimax DS into Exakt active Linn 350's sounding really good.

I've heard a Linn Klimax DS into active Linn Majik Isobariks sounding not so good.

I've not heard a Benchmark DAC baked off against a Linn Klimax DS. I'd be interested in finding out if the Klimax DS sounds better, and if it's worth the £thousands extra.

Me too........but not going to happen.

 

[matt49]

Edit, its a market maturing to a new technology and does not know which way to go. Amps are current for decades, DAC's are computer based, change happens faster in this world. So unless all amps become like your Devialet computer based and upgradable surley DAC's belong outside or in streamers?

Very good point. I am on my third streaming solution, but still with my original amp. In terms of support over the long term, separate boxes are definitely the way to go.

DAC technology is now mature. Aside from the inclusion of DSD (which is of very limited value IMO), little has changed in DACs in recent years. What's changing fast (here I agree with andyjm) is streamer and (I'd add) DSP functionality. So I'm sticking to my guns: I'd rather keep the DAC and streamer separate and am happy wit the idea of the DAC in the amp.

In an all-digital system DSP is easy to do in a separate module upstream of the DAC (e.g. a miniDSP or a DSPeaker Antimode).

 

[Womaz]

You are correct about it all getting confusing for the consumer, I am no hi fi whiz, but I do have a decent knowledge of equipment etc. Or so I thought.

I am looking to replace the CLIC, my network player. It has a DAC so now I need a DAC. Do i go for a streamer with a DAC? A part of me thinks I should be focusing on getting the best DAC i can afford. Then a cheaper streamer. Truth is though I have no idea.

Why is the Linn Akurate so expensive. Is it because of the quality of the DAC. I dont even know if it has got one?

So imagine if you are a first time hifi buyer? Must be a minefield.

 

[iQ Speakers]

Exactly Womaz. Imagine if you bought an expensive amp with DAC. 5 years later you want to upgrade your steamer. Your choice of streamers is narrowed to those which don't have a DAC, or bypass the DAC in your expensive amp. It never happened with CD players why with Streamers? The average HiFi consumer needs clarity and consistency across products. Edit the ideal scenario is that all manufacturers separated streamer, DAC and amp

 

[matt49]

Fair points all.

One of the weird things that's happened recently is the emergence of a whole market for "high-end" streamers: Aurender, Auralic, Antipodes, Astell & Kern -- and that's just the ones beginning with A! We're being asked to believe that these boxes (which are effectively just nicely packaged Linux machines) are worth paying thousands of pounds for.

Or you could build your own Raspberry Pi machine pretty easily for beer money.

Your choice ...

Edvard Munch: The Stream.

 

[iQ Speakers]

Kind of agree the quality of a streamer is in it's interface usability and stability and should be about its DAC's analog stage. Sonos need to make a higher end Connect that costs £500-700. Matt I look forward to your usual thorough and incite full findings.

 

[matt49]

Kind of agree the quality of a streamer is in it's interface usability and stability and should be about its DAC's analog stage. Sonos need to make a higher end Connect that costs £500-700. Matt I look forward to your usual thorough and incite full findings.

Boggit,

when we meet for a listen to your speakers, I can provide a modded Sonos Connect for us to try out. I'd be interested in your view.

Matt

 

[iQ Speakers]

Wow cheers Matt, let's hope it's before the Cambridge CXN streamer comes out in March complete with colour screen and AirPlay. Because if the Sonos gave me the sound, that would be the way to go.

 

[cheeseboy]

Some streamers cost a lot of money, and I really do wonder whether they're worth it. In a couple of months (June?) I plan to do some proper testing.

One view is that there's no point in spending big. A Raspberry Pi can do most things for pennies. A Sonos Connect comes in under £300. Is it really worth spending more? Has anyone tested the SQ of these streamers properly?

I'm open minded and sceptical.

It's very true though. The streamer part of a system can be made for next to nothing, as you've just said, the pi is an excellent bit of kit for that.

I'm guessing where the manufacturers tend to add on the cash is if they include a dac/analogue output stage. A lot of manufactureres even use a heap of open source software, so they can't start saying anything about that either.

there's no reason for a box that just streams to cost a lot of money. It just basically passes stuff on from where the data is held to the output stage.