Streamers - What is the point?

[John Duncan]

With a streamer you seem to be paying largely for the ease of use. Whether it's worth the extra cash is up to you. And whether a streamer can be classed as a computer or not seems to me rather irrelevant.

Indeed. I don't care. Streamers get rid of wires between computers and hifi, and that's worth any number of ££ for me. YMMV.

 

[ngibbs]

Sorry I'm late to the party, and also sorry I haven't read through all of the last 6 pages (!) but can I just point out that this:

I did not dismiss PCs as a source - just as a high-res source because of all the faffing required - because you need to do the switching to preserve the sound quality. And those 'tied-in' apps will cost half of a midrange streamer.

...is not true. I paid £7 for BitPerfect on my Mac, which does all the bit-depth and bit-rate switching for me, and I hear there are equivalents on PCs which do it for free.

Hi MajorFubar

Could you explain what benefits you get from BitPerfect please? I've had a read of their website after seeing your post but I'm not sure I understood what extra it would offer me over the experience I get at the moment.

I currently use a MacBook Air connected to an async DAC (Leema Elements DAC) via USB. I primarily listen to Spotify. Would I experience any benefit from buying BitPerfect? I notice that it is designed to work with iTunes, is it exclusively iTunes or would it improve the sound quality of Spotify too and it so, how?

Many thanks.

Hope the Major won't mind me answering a message addressed to him!

Bit Perfect bolts onto iTunes on Macs only and takes over the signal, making it Bit Perfect (hence the name). It won't do anything for Spotify. Great value at 7 quid, and sounds wonderful. I've never done a comparison with the more expensive apps such as Pure or Audirvana so I don't know if they're worth the extra cash. The only caveat I've found is that it makes clunky iTunes even clunkier, which means your RAM has to be up to it. I often find the 4GB on my MacBook Air isn't (note to self - buy computers with 8GB RAM minimum.....).

 

[BigH]

Sorry I'm late to the party, and also sorry I haven't read through all of the last 6 pages (!) but can I just point out that this:

I did not dismiss PCs as a source - just as a high-res source because of all the faffing required - because you need to do the switching to preserve the sound quality. And those 'tied-in' apps will cost half of a midrange streamer.

...is not true. I paid £7 for BitPerfect on my Mac, which does all the bit-depth and bit-rate switching for me, and I hear there are equivalents on PCs which do it for free.

Hi MajorFubar

Could you explain what benefits you get from BitPerfect please? I've had a read of their website after seeing your post but I'm not sure I understood what extra it would offer me over the experience I get at the moment.

I currently use a MacBook Air connected to an async DAC (Leema Elements DAC) via USB. I primarily listen to Spotify. Would I experience any benefit from buying BitPerfect? I notice that it is designed to work with iTunes, is it exclusively iTunes or would it improve the sound quality of Spotify too and it so, how?

Many thanks.

Hope the Major won't mind me answering a message addressed to him!

Bit Perfect bolts onto iTunes on Macs only and takes over the signal, making it Bit Perfect (hence the name). It won't do anything for Spotify. Great value at 7 quid, and sounds wonderful. I've never done a comparison with the more expensive apps such as Pure or Audirvana so I don't know if they're worth the extra cash. The only caveat I've found is that it makes clunky iTunes even clunkier, (note to self - buy computers with 8GB RAM minimum.....).

What 4GB of Ram to play a bit music is not enough?

 

[ngibbs]

Sorry I'm late to the party, and also sorry I haven't read through all of the last 6 pages (!) but can I just point out that this:

I did not dismiss PCs as a source - just as a high-res source because of all the faffing required - because you need to do the switching to preserve the sound quality. And those 'tied-in' apps will cost half of a midrange streamer.

...is not true. I paid £7 for BitPerfect on my Mac, which does all the bit-depth and bit-rate switching for me, and I hear there are equivalents on PCs which do it for free.

Hi MajorFubar

Could you explain what benefits you get from BitPerfect please? I've had a read of their website after seeing your post but I'm not sure I understood what extra it would offer me over the experience I get at the moment.

I currently use a MacBook Air connected to an async DAC (Leema Elements DAC) via USB. I primarily listen to Spotify. Would I experience any benefit from buying BitPerfect? I notice that it is designed to work with iTunes, is it exclusively iTunes or would it improve the sound quality of Spotify too and it so, how?

Many thanks.

Hope the Major won't mind me answering a message addressed to him!

Bit Perfect bolts onto iTunes on Macs only and takes over the signal, making it Bit Perfect (hence the name). It won't do anything for Spotify. Great value at 7 quid, and sounds wonderful. I've never done a comparison with the more expensive apps such as Pure or Audirvana so I don't know if they're worth the extra cash. The only caveat I've found is that it makes clunky iTunes even clunkier, (note to self - buy computers with 8GB RAM minimum.....).

What 4GB of Ram to play a bit music is not enough?

I sometimes find that my computer is struggling (and it's not old - see sig.) with iTunes + Bit Perfect + M2Tech HiFace 2 software , and I'd always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it was due to that. On the website they recommend 4GB minimum, and most MacMini users whose sigs I've seen use 8GB. I could be completely wrong - I'm certainly no computer expert.

 

[MajorFubar]

Evidently a case of YMMV then as I use iTunes + BitPerfect on an i5 Mac Mini with only 2GB or RAM and it works well.

 

[ngibbs]

Evidently a case of YMMV then as I use iTunes + BitPerfect on an i5 Mac Mini with only 2GB or RAM and it works well.

Glad to be proved wrong. I don't know what YMMV means but glad yours is working well! I wonder what's causing the problem with mine then......

 

[matt49]

I don't know what YMMV means ...

Your Mac May Vary

 

[Um]

With a streamer you seem to be paying largely for the ease of use. Whether it's worth the extra cash is up to you. And whether a streamer can be classed as a computer or not seems to me rather irrelevant.

Indeed. I don't care. Streamers get rid of wires between computers and hifi, and that's worth any number of ££ for me. YMMV.

Don't you plug the streamer into your amp? I see the quiet laptop as the ultimate streamer. At least it has a big screen you can watch the art work on.

 

[MajorFubar]

lol it means 'your mileage may vary', it's a copout clause!

 

[John Duncan]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.

 

[John Duncan]

lol it means 'your mileage may vary', it's a copout clause!

B-locks it is. If somebody wants to plug their computer into their stereo, you won't hear any complaints from me (other than that my Sony Vaio's audio out sounded like a buzz saw when plugged into the mains). If I did that, on the other hand, I would be found hanging in the shed from a Wireworld USB cable (their extra thickness in this situation being their only advantage over cheap USB cables).

 

[Um]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.[/quote

] Yes yes. That's why you need a cheap dedicated laptop for hifi. I can control it with my ipad and wierdly my Apple TV remote.?

 

[MajorFubar]

<p>

</p><p>lol it means 'your mileage may vary', it's a copout clause!</p><p>

</p>

B-locks it is. If somebody wants to plug their computer into their stereo, you won't hear any complaints from me (other than that my Sony Vaio's audio out sounded like a buzz saw when plugged into the mains). If I did that, on the other hand, I would be found hanging in the shed from a Wireworld USB cable (their extra thickness in this situation being their only advantage over cheap USB cables).

Calm down John I was only answering what YMMV meant...I forgot to quote the asker. What works best for each person is down to individual taste. But we probably established that fact somewhere down the first page. Certainly I'm not here to sell either solution as superior or inferior.

 

[matt49]

At least it has a big screen you can watch the art work on.

I assume you're having a laugh ...

 

[John Duncan]

<p>

</p><p>lol it means 'your mileage may vary', it's a copout clause!</p><p>

</p>

B-locks it is. If somebody wants to plug their computer into their stereo, you won't hear any complaints from me (other than that my Sony Vaio's audio out sounded like a buzz saw when plugged into the mains). If I did that, on the other hand, I would be found hanging in the shed from a Wireworld USB cable (their extra thickness in this situation being their only advantage over cheap USB cables).

Calm down John I was only answering what YMMV meant...I forgot to quote the asker. What works best for each person is down to individual taste. But we probably established that fact somewhere down the first page. Certainly I'm not here to sell either solution as superior or inferior.

Did that come across as ill-humoured? Sorry, it wasn't meant to

 

[TimothyRias]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.

Yes yes. That's why you need a cheap dedicated laptop for hifi. I can control it with my ipad and wierdly my Apple TV remote.?

Or you build the laptop into a chassis that stacks nicely with the rest of your hifi kit, and call it a streamer.

 

[Um]

At least it has a big screen you can watch the art work on.

I assume you're having a laugh ...

 

[Um]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.

Yes yes. That's why you need a cheap dedicated laptop for hifi. I can control it with my ipad and wierdly my Apple TV remote.?

Or you build the laptop into a chassis that stacks nicely with the rest of your hifi kit, and call it a streamer.

Actually quite! It's all poppy ****... As long as its all going into a reasonable dac then who cares.

 

[Um]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.

Yes yes. That's why you need a cheap dedicated laptop for hifi. I can control it with my ipad and wierdly my Apple TV remote.?

Or you build the laptop into a chassis that stacks nicely with the rest of your hifi kit, and call it a streamer.

Actually quite! It's all poppy ****... As long as its all going into a reasonable dac then who cares.

wow, it edited my Kock.

 

[Sospri]

Of course, but it sits on top of the amp, as opposed to nine feet away on my lap.

Yes yes. That's why you need a cheap dedicated laptop for hifi. I can control it with my ipad and wierdly my Apple TV remote.?

Or you build the laptop into a chassis that stacks nicely with the rest of your hifi kit, and call it a streamer.

Actually quite! It's all poppy ****... As long as its all going into a reasonable dac then who cares.

wow, it edited my Kock.

You ought to be careful of that, it can make your eyes water............

 

[manicm]

Sorry I'm late to the party, and also sorry I haven't read through all of the last 6 pages (!) but can I just point out that this:

I did not dismiss PCs as a source - just as a high-res source because of all the faffing required - because you need to do the switching to preserve the sound quality. And those 'tied-in' apps will cost half of a midrange streamer.

...is not true. I paid £7 for BitPerfect on my Mac, which does all the bit-depth and bit-rate switching for me, and I hear there are equivalents on PCs which do it for free.

If there are I'd love to know - as one of the first ones cost hundreds of pounds, name of which I've forgotten. Like JD says it's down to personal taste, and if I were to get serious about streaming I'd like to get a dedicated player.

 

[steve_1979]

As I said in the post above; the levels of distortion in the DAC section of a streamer can be reduced below the levels that are audible to the human ear. This includes distortion introduced by noise and jitter.

You're right, of course, that noise and jitter can be reduced to inaudibility (or virtual inaudibility). The question is: how often are they?...

An interesting question.

While it's possible for DAC's to have distortion below or very close to the level of human audiablility not all do. I've read of at least one DAC (I forget which) that was designed and tested only by ear and that had quite alot of distortion, well above what is audible.

 

[steve_1979]

As I said in the post above; the levels of distortion in the DAC section of a streamer can be reduced below the levels that are audible to the human ear. This includes distortion introduced by noise and jitter.

You're right, of course, that noise and jitter can be reduced to inaudibility (or virtual inaudibility). The question is: how often are they?

Talking about a bit perfect digital message in this context is a red herring, however. It's confusing two quite separate things, i.e. the message, which is digital and can be bit perfect (or not), and the signal, which is physical (either electrical or optical). Jim Lesurf, Information and Measurement (Institute of Physics, 2001), chap. 3, is very good on this.

This is, in my experience, very much at the heart of the matter. I was noticing significant differences between transports into some dacs, but strangely not others. My initial thoughts, based on the gigo principle, was that the better dac was showing up the inadequacies of the transport, but further investication showed this not to be the case and that no such correlation could be found.

In fact it appeared that the dacs themselves were at the center of the issue, simply failing to 'sit well' in some systems, for example a well known, highly regarded budget dac sounded obviously harsh and grainy on many of our systems though apparently sounded fine in others, similarly a much more expensive dac by the same designer exhibited similar bibolar tendencies in the 'wrong' systems.

My feeling is that noise, particularly RF noise, is at the heart of the problem and it is the way that systems handle this that can be the issue, RF is nasty stuff and can get into anything, and the effect that it has varies enormously. Dacs for example, like those mentioned above, can be badly affected by incoming RF noise and can also be a huge source of noise themselves, it can get quite complicated.

Interesting post.

I've read (in the bible of Ashley James ) that DAC's can give off RF noise which is why they can sometimes sound different to one another. Apparently some amplifiers are more susceptible to RF interference than others which is why otherwise distortion free DAC's can sometime sound different depending on which amplifier you partner them with.

 

[steve_1979]

I agree that you should always listen for yourself.

But it's also worth bearing in mind that anything that defies science usually isn't right (unless you have somehow stumbled upon a new and previously undescovered law of physics).

I suppose I'm talking about a "digital renderer", but who the ffk knows what that is......but saying that, ime how the thing is designed will effect how it sounds.

My suggestion is - To read a little less, listen a little more, and don't assume that what you believe as indisputable science is absolutely correct....then my friend, you will go far!

Regarding audio equipment I always make a a decision based on how it sounds to my ears because at the end of the day it's my ears that I use to listen to music with.

However, I'm also aware that my ears/brain are not infallible and I can sometime think that I can hear a difference where really there is no difference to be heard (that old blind testing chestnut again).

 

[davedotco]

As I said in the post above; the levels of distortion in the DAC section of a streamer can be reduced below the levels that are audible to the human ear. This includes distortion introduced by noise and jitter.

You're right, of course, that noise and jitter can be reduced to inaudibility (or virtual inaudibility). The question is: how often are they?

Talking about a bit perfect digital message in this context is a red herring, however. It's confusing two quite separate things, i.e. the message, which is digital and can be bit perfect (or not), and the signal, which is physical (either electrical or optical). Jim Lesurf, Information and Measurement (Institute of Physics, 2001), chap. 3, is very good on this.

This is, in my experience, very much at the heart of the matter. I was noticing significant differences between transports into some dacs, but strangely not others. My initial thoughts, based on the gigo principle, was that the better dac was showing up the inadequacies of the transport, but further investication showed this not to be the case and that no such correlation could be found.

In fact it appeared that the dacs themselves were at the center of the issue, simply failing to 'sit well' in some systems, for example a well known, highly regarded budget dac sounded obviously harsh and grainy on many of our systems though apparently sounded fine in others, similarly a much more expensive dac by the same designer exhibited similar bibolar tendencies in the 'wrong' systems.

My feeling is that noise, particularly RF noise, is at the heart of the problem and it is the way that systems handle this that can be the issue, RF is nasty stuff and can get into anything, and the effect that it has varies enormously. Dacs for example, like those mentioned above, can be badly affected by incoming RF noise and can also be a huge source of noise themselves, it can get quite complicated.

Interesting post.

I've read (in the bible of Ashley James ) that DAC's can give off RF noise which is why they can sometimes sound different to one another. Apparently some amplifiers are more susceptible to RF interference than others which is why otherwise distortion free DAC's can sometime sound different depending on which amplifier you partner them with.

Beware, it is not quite that straightforward.

Dacs operate at radio freqencies and some radiate excessive noise at these frequencies, sometimes via their connected cables, including the mains, sometimes just through the air. Other items of equipment, amps in the main, may be affected, something of a lottery really.

In addition, some transports, be they computers, streamers or CD spinners, produce noise and maybe jitter, inaudible in itself but possibly audible in terms of the way that it interacts with the dac in the system. This is all rather beyond my area of expertise but is based on empirical data, both my own listening experiences and measurements by people such as Paul Miller.