Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[Rexp]

I guess this forum has sponsors that sell audiophile network components, so I don't want to discuss that too much. I was just pointing out that the posts claiming the signal could actually get BETTER if sent through fancy network components was false.

In general, what is your opinion of the sound quality we get from Tidal/Qobuz?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I guess this forum has sponsors that sell audiophile network components, so I don't want to discuss that too much. I was just pointing out that the posts claiming the signal could actually get BETTER if sent through fancy network components was false.

define BETTER as you wrote the word. want to make sure i understand your meaning. could the performance be improved even though the actual signal does not change? what is the signal and what is the environment it's traveling on?

are we at a point where everything is known about optimizing networks relative to data transfer and network noise management for music reproduction?

and are you one of those folks that knows everything about it? for sure, i'm not. i'm just a buyer of gear and network tweaks.

just trying to be clear about your claims.

 

[treitz3]

I guess this forum has sponsors that sell audiophile network components, so I don't want to discuss that too much. I was just pointing out that the posts claiming the signal could actually get BETTER if sent through fancy network components was false.

I think I know where you are coming from but this statement needs a little bit more clarity.

Tom

 

[sigbergaudio]

There is also the topic of network traffic as it relates to sound quality, but that is outside of my experience or understanding. My own network only has one wired connection, that being between the router and the streamer (in different rooms), with everything else connected via wifi. I have wondered if that is an advantage, but as some have pointed out to me, it is still one network -- that is, the wifi doesn't separate out the traffic from all the other devices.

Anyone concerned about noise should use wifi, as it's not physically possible for noise from the power grid, power supplies and whatnot to be transmitted over wifi. You only get the data. So then if you still insist on worrying about noise, at least all you have to worry about is inherent noise in the streamer itself (and the separate DAC if you have that). Using wifi you have physically isolated you from anything related to the network and network components as far as noise is concerned.

 

[sigbergaudio]

In general, what is your opinion of the sound quality we get from Tidal/Qobuz?

In general, both services offer lossless CD quality (or even higher) streams. So if you disregard the fact that we do not have control over, or transparent information about, the master used / source used, I would say the sound quality will typically be as good as or better than CD.

 

[sigbergaudio]

define BETTER as you wrote the word. want to make sure i understand your meaning. could the performance be improved even though the actual signal does not change? what is the signal and what is the environment it's traveling on?

In general the burden of proof should be with the person who claims something to be, that was not me.

For the sake of discussion:
No, I do not think the performance can be improved without changing the signal. The signal is what carries the sound that we hear. If the "environment it's travelling on" for instance adds noise, that will change an analog signal, and it will be degraded. With digital signals, not necessarily so.

The claim being made was that the signal going into a network could be improved. That sounds implausible (to put it nicely). And I would very much like to hear an explanation of how network components can understand the signals being carried and improve upon them. It doesn't make any sense.

are we at a point where everything is known about optimizing networks relative to data transfer and network noise management for music reproduction?

Personally I think this is pretty far down the list of things I would worry about if I wanted to improve the sound in my system.

and are you one of those folks that knows everything about it? for sure, i'm not. i'm just a buyer of gear and network tweaks.

just trying to be clear about your claims.

I have a pretty solid background in how both local networks and the internet works (it has at one point been my full time job for several years). But I know audiophiles easily disregard that type of competence when discussing this subject, so not sure how relevant you find it to be.

Again I don't necessarily want to go too far down this route as a WBF sponsor, as I know there are other sponsors who sell audiophile network gear. But it's one thing to claim that it reduces noise, it's another to claim it actually improves the signal beyond the original quality of the source. That is what I reacted to initially in this thread.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I think I know where you are coming from but this statement needs a little bit more clarity.

Tom

Can you please elaborate on what is unclear (also reading my latest replies to others), and then I will happily try to add clarity if still needed.

 

[skinnyfla]

@sigbergaudio - so, from a technical point, in general is it fair to say, that a lossless WAV RIP with dBPoweramp should be equal to a CD and also - regardless of the master problem - a streamed file from Qobuz or Tidal should not be inferior to the direkt CD - so there is no clear advantage in buying an expensive CD transport anymore as the RIP of the same CD will be "just as good"? Thus - for someone building a digital chain (as a secondary solution) and on a budget, the main invest/focus should be the DAC and the streaming - bridge, as this will have the biggest influence on the sound?

 

[sigbergaudio]

@sigbergaudio - so, from a technical point, in general is it fair to say, that a lossless WAV RIP with dBPoweramp should be equal to a CD and also - regardless of the master problem - a streamed file from Qobuz or Tidal should not be inferior to the direkt CD - so there is no clear advantage in buying an expensive CD transport anymore as the RIP of the same CD will be "just as good"? Thus - for someone building a digital chain (as a secondary solution) and on a budget, the main invest/focus should be the DAC and the streaming - bridge, as this will have the biggest influence on the sound?

In my personal opinion the largest influence will be your speakers and room, then the sound quality of the track itself (both inherent quality as in resolution/bits, but also how it has been mixed and mastered), then your amp and DAC/streamer,

Personally I would not bother with rips either, I would go with streaming ten times out of ten. But I respect that others like the physical aspect of CD or vinyl, both with collecting it and actually having something physical to touch and see when you play it. Nothing wrong with that, but imo there's not really any sonic advantage. I used to have both myself, but that was many years ago.

 

[Rexp]

In my personal opinion the largest influence will be your speakers and room, then the sound quality of the track itself (both inherent quality as in resolution/bits, but also how it has been mixed and mastered), then your amp and DAC/streamer,

Personally I would not bother with rips either, I would go with streaming ten times out of ten. But I respect that others like the physical aspect of CD or vinyl, both with collecting it and actually having something physical to touch and see when you play it. Nothing wrong with that, but imo there's not really any sonic advantage. I used to have both myself, but that was many years ago.

Everything you've written above is wrong in my experience so I'm guessing you can also be safely ignored when it comes to network advice.

 

[Al M.]

Everything you've written above is wrong in my experience so I'm guessing you can also be safely ignored when it comes to network advice.

Agreed. I have had my suspicions for a while already. Not every industry expert is an expert on everything; in fact, none are.

I wouldn't trust my DAC designer on loudspeaker design, my loudspeaker designer on DAC design, and my amplifier designer on either. And yet, they all are highly capable and innovative in their own fields, and I admire them for that. More importantly, I thoroughly enjoy their products.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Everything you've written above is wrong in my experience so I'm guessing you can also be safely ignored when it comes to network advice.

Which part specifically? Even that speakers and room matters most?

EDIT: I am also perfectly happy not to be asked for advice about networks, so that is fine.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Agreed. I have had my suspicions for a while already. Not every industry expert is an expert on everything; in fact, none are.

I wouldn't trust my DAC designer on loudspeaker design, my loudspeaker designer on DAC design, and my amplifier designer on either. And yet, they all are highly capable and innovative in their own fields, and I admire them for that. More importantly, I thoroughly enjoy their products.

It's fair to assume that we are of different opinions at least. That was not a big surprise. Who is right or wrong will likely not be determined on this fourm.

 

[skinnyfla]

… crazy how much opinions vary… seems like there must be a “night and day” difference - as opinions are partially completely opposite... if it were so, there wouldn’t be different opinions though, as the differences would have to be so obvious and clearly audible that there would be no discussion… now that’s a conundrum

 

[Rexp]

Which part specifically? Even that speakers and room matters most?

EDIT: I am also perfectly happy not to be asked for advice about networks, so that is fine.

This is basic stuff, but which combo is going to sound better?

1. Poor master played by poor streamer/DAC/Pre into $100,000 active speakers.

2. Good master played by good streamer/DAC/Pre into $5000 active speakers.

 

[sigbergaudio]

This is basic stuff, but which combo is going to sound better?

1. Poor master played by poor streamer/DAC/Pre into $100,000 active speakers.

2. Good master played by good streamer/DAC/Pre into $5000 active speakers.

Interesting question, the master is of course important, so it muddles the issue a bit, since you're changing two things at once.

Let's change it to:

1. Identical master played by a poor streamer/dac/pre into good active speakers
2. Identical master played by good streamer/dac/pre into poor active speakers

Then the answer is #1.

EDIT: The question is further muddied by "poor" and "good", which is often but not always correlated to price. As an example you can find good cheap dacs, and you can find poor expensive dacs.

 

[rando]

Wireless connections are not better for arriving later. WiFi is currently seeing a high rate of development and deployment in place of physical wiring on the service and utility provider end. Swinging in this, or any other currently being swelled with interest, direction does not make it better. Nor does it make it worse.

What makes it better or worse is... funny how as you travel around the world the variance in public knowledge, laws, acceptance of products with known health or environmental risks... ready access to sales data that needs to pass a very low bar. ( @andromedaaudio )

Instead of suggesting what I would do if I were a rich man, substitute intelligent man. If I were that, my brain would be avoiding swimming in the amount of waves immense effort is expended towards isolating every piece of electronic equipment from. Much the same as I would make efforts to remove both to a location free of ground and air born vibration. Lack of issues intruding defines the amount of remedies intruding upon work to attain better sound. To enjoy better sound.

Only through this will I get [analog] levels of enrichment through [digital] ends. That and recognizing the parallel with impeccably cleaning vinyl that is finally possible at this late date.

 

[Rexp]

Interesting question, the master is of course important, so it muddles the issue a bit, since you're changing two things at once.

Let's change it to:

1. Identical master played by a poor streamer/dac/pre into good active speakers
2. Identical master played by good streamer/dac/pre into poor active speakers

Then the answer is #1.

EDIT: The question is further muddied by "poor" and "good", which is often but not always correlated to price. As an example you can find good cheap dacs, and you can find poor expensive dacs.

Nope. GIGO always applies.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

… crazy how much opinions vary… seems like there must be a “night and day” difference - as opinions are partially completely opposite... if it were so, there wouldn’t be different opinions though, as the differences would have to be so obvious and clearly audible that there would be no discussion… now that’s a conundrum

Not at all, shows how system dependent this is. Personally on both my systems it is very close and anole is preferred on both systems but not by a wide margin. Yet I have more invested (oxymoron) in my digital front end to get it to this place.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Nope. GIGO always applies.

Not really, as the difference between a poor speaker and a good speaker is much larger than the difference between a poor dac and a good dac.

According to your thinking a really good DAC connected to a 500USD desktop speaker will sound better than a 100,000USD speaker connected directly to say a 500USD streamer without a separate DAC? Is that correctly understood?