More Consensus That Streaming Is An Inferior Format & Not High End?

[andromedaaudio]

If this thread runs out of steam , i will open another thread .

More consensus that large bandwith /non resonant LS are superior to other designs .

I reckon that will get things going again

 

[Mike Lavigne]

If this thread runs out of steam , i will open another thread .

More consensus that large bandwith /non resonant LS are superior to other designs .

I reckon that will get things going again

what's a friggin LS?

 

[andromedaaudio]

LS is short for loudspeakers

 

[Ron Resnick]

Hi Tango,
Take your $25K, spend $15K on the DAC and Streamer and the other $10K building a network that cleans and reconditions the incoming data stream and you‘ll end up with a beautiful sounding system

On the other hand, spend $50K on your DAC and Server and feed it directly with raw, consumer-grade modem/router internet feed and all my bets on the resulting sonic quality are off

Or, assuming one is happy to handle physical media, spend $20,000 on a DAC, $1,000 on a streamer, $4,000 on a CD transport, use the modest streaming set-up to explore and find new music, order a CD of the music you find, play the CD, and avoid all of the computer network complications and fussiness to “clean and recondition” the data that you now have residing in the CD.

PS: My numerous, and rapidly evolving, digital experiences the last few weeks, culminating in CD transport —> Lampizator Baltic 4, has created some appreciation for lowly Redbook CD. I am more understanding of Lloyd’s and Al’s policy decision than I used to be. The Baltic 4 changed a lot for me regarding digital.

 

[PeterA]

Or, assuming one is happy to handle physical media, spend $20,000 on a DAC, $1,000 on a streamer, $4,000 on a CD transport, use the modest streaming set-up to explore and find new music, order a CD of the music you find, play the CD, and avoid all of the computer network complications and fussiness to “clean and recondition” the data that you now have residing in the CD.

I thought I read "clean, recondition, and repair". I do that with my LPs when using my RCM, then record brush and new inner sleeves and finally routing the signal through the RIAA curve in the phono stage.

 

[PYP]

If this thread runs out of steam , i will open another thread .

More consensus that large bandwith /non resonant LS are superior to other designs .

I reckon that will get things going again

a separate "clickbait forum" with these kind of titles makes a lot of sense. And I really enjoy the whole "more consensus" concept. I think it means if you don't have consensus and then add one opinion, you now have more consensus.

Or maybe the video just got me in a sour mood. Paul starts out not knowing how many Qobuz albums or songs there are. I was thinking: Paul, there is a thing called the internet. In less than one minute you can have a relatively firm number (even if it is changing as you search). He is a great salesman though.

 

[MarkusBarkus]

...please sir: may I have more consensus?

 

[Amir]

Amir,

my sarcastic reaction to your post is about your points made as if they are facts. you have a right to your own opinions, but not your own facts. when posters take dismissive approaches to anything, and paint with broad brushes, without doing the comprehensive work to back it up, it causes conflict. and Audio Note UK Peter has a right to his opinions too, but i don't see him as any authority about streaming. i go into AN rooms at shows and like the sound, but mostly it's 'meh'. yet i know he makes very fine gear. so yes, he can offer his perspective. but it's just a damn opinion. that is all. citing him chapter and verse and then throwing it out as gospel does not advance the discussion. it might help to link the article you cited, i could not find it.

and now you try to link issues with the 16/44 format, and the CD, somehow to streaming. you are just confusing the issue. much of my streaming is at higher resolutions. so your point, whether right or wrong, is not really helping us to determine about streaming. it's beside the point. personally i find that CD or 16/44 files or streaming can be wonderful depending on the recording. fantastic even. but in my experience a great recording of a native file of higher resolution, whether streaming or a server file, has a higher ceiling. i do this compare every day. for hours. but not all files at any resolution are created equal. the recording itself is more significant.

no one is claiming streaming is perfect sound. or that CD beats vinyl. not sure where that is coming from.

i have done the work on streaming at various levels, now at the highest levels, verses all other formats; but all i have is my opinions.

we all have choices how we present our perspectives, but spouting opinions in all knowing dismissive tones, get's in the way of dialog.

Mike
Thank you for your writing
If you find any wrong thing in my posts please let me know where exactly is it and I will clarify about it.
Peter Qvortrup article is not about Streaming and he has an article about right method of judging system transparency.
This is the link :

Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? Article By Leonard Norwitz And Peter Qvortrup

Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? Article By Leonard Norwitz And Peter Qvortrup

www.enjoythemusic.com

As peter article describe transparency , What I think is "a transparent system will show you more than 30% contrast/difference between formats (CD, Stream, Vinyl)" .
30% contrast/difference does not mean Stream is crap and CD is perfect , NO, It just means there is more than 30% contrast/difference between two sounds.
I told before file/stream is close to CD in many respects but in wide dynamic range systems (like good tube/horns) the CD playback beats 16bit/44khz streaming.
We know many 192khz/24bits are not real in streaming and most of the time 16bit/44khz AAD is better than those high rez files.

I have seen you use Isolation transformer if i am not mistaken. Even big Isolation transformers limit dynamics specially in bass. I think low impedance AC quality is very important to have dynamic sound.
I did not listen to David system but I think his judgment about Stream vs CD is coming from a dynamic system. He has horn if i am not mistaken.

 

[Blackmorec]

Hi - I don't know the technology of audio streaming but I am curious about "building a network that cleans and reconditions the incoming data stream". Could you pls describe in more detail what that is? I don't need specific equipment, but what takes place at what point in the data delivery.

I will also ask a question that received no answer earlier, since it seems to fall within the area of data integrity: Does streamed audio data include metadata about the stream itself such that source data and received data can be compared against one another, analogous to a checksum?

Hi Tima, this is just a stream of consciousness.
First and foremost your whole network needs plenty of bandwidth performance so you are not experiencing bottlenecks anywhere in the system
The next goal is to minimize network traffic on the entire hi-fi network, which should ideally be a network backwater that gets only audio related traffic
Then there’s isolation. You want your hifi isolated from broadband/internet cable and router noise so either a radio or optical step Between router and server
Next you should make sure that all cabling is properly isolated so there’s no ground plane noise hopping from one compotent to the next. This is achieved by having zero continuity in cable screens, ideally implementing a screen star earth arrangement into a low impedance earth.
Power supplies are the ticking heart of streaming so they can be as excellent as you like as you’ll hear any and every upgrade clearly if your network is arranged correctly
Also i like to stick to a single power supply supplier so i don’t get different noise spectra interacting and creating harmonics.
I have found that DC cables play an extraordinarily important role. I use Nenon’s Mundorf Silver/gold in a JSSG360 screening arrangement Throughout the whole system. Powered supplies are wired internally with the same cable.
Next is vibration control. All my network components and their power supplies are treated to avoid external generation and set up to either generate less vibration or convert it to another form like heat.
EMI should be minimized, both internally generated and radiated from outside.
Then there’s the arrangement of the network. Like the rest of hi-fi, the better the input signal into a network component the better its output in terms of physical layer ‘perfection’. Of course it doesn't make sense to follow a high spec component with a lower spec, less capable piece. For example, no point following a OCXO 3ppb accurate clock wIth something of much lower spec so ideally the network is arranged as a series of improving specifications such that the output of each step is a series of cleaner, more accurately timed, less noisy outputs, in whatever physical state the network needs. In this way an improvement at the modem is compounded at each following step. One reason to standardise on a single vendor loom is so that the cabling can be gradually improved as it gets closer to the DAC.
I also use a cascade of switches, to filter, clean and retime the data stream. As the final stream is stored in and played from RAM, the extra latency plays no role, but the extra levels of filtering and clock refinement really help the final sound.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike
Thank you for your writing
If you find any wrong thing in my posts please let me know where exactly is it and I will clarify about it.
Peter Qvortrup article is not about Streaming and he has an article about right method of judging system transparency.
This is the link :

Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? Article By Leonard Norwitz And Peter Qvortrup

Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? Article By Leonard Norwitz And Peter Qvortrup

www.enjoythemusic.com

As peter article describe transparency , What I think is "a transparent system will show you more than 30% contrast/difference between formats (CD, Stream, Vinyl)" .
30% contrast/difference does not mean Stream is crap and CD is perfect , NO, It just means there is more than 30% contrast/difference between two sounds.

scanning the article, what struck me was his comparison by contrast perspective, which has always been my view too (it's not really on topic). i avoid coloration since it paints a sameness over the music. not only tonally, but also with degrees of energy and flow. every recording should be as individual as possible. when i was comparing amplifiers some years back it was my main point causing my preference for my darTZeel's. contrast has to be joined by musical envelopment and involvement too, contrast for contrast's sake misses the mark.

a system should get out of the way of the music, including being able to reproduce everything on the recording. if the system can't do it all, then that reduces the differences between recordings. doing it all including soundstage imaging is part of that. not every recording can do that, but if it's there the system should optimize it. the format/media is only one piece of the system.

percentages used to generalize format differences? don't like it one bit. the very best of each format played back at SOTA are not that different. below SOTA playback and with less that optimized media any result is possible and the value of the information is zero. it gives you a wrong conclusion.

certainly everyone has a viewpoint about what they hear; the problem comes when you want to then offer that personal perspective in a general application. then the media, system and process are put under scrutiny. is this anecdotal? or is it sufficiently rigorous to reveal a higher general truth?

I told before file/stream is close to CD in many respects but in wide dynamic range systems (like good tube/horns) the CD playback beats 16bit/44khz streaming.
We know many 192khz/24bits are not real in streaming and most of the time 16bit/44khz AAD is better than those high rez files.

we cannot generalize about any type of media. each individual one must stand on it's own. CD, streaming or vinyl all can be great performances, great recordings, native format, and perfect masterings, or they can be junk at every step. we simply cannot draw conclusions about differences without finding enough of the best examples of each format, and have the best playback gear and systems. now we can judge the result to understand what that format can do when it's not compromised by bad media.

so based on using the best examples, i reject your conclusions completely. that is my experience. and i do agree that plenty of high rez streaming is not credible. but lots more is credible.

I have seen you use Isolation transformer if i am not mistaken. Even big Isolation transformers limit dynamics specially in bass. I think low impedance AC quality is very important to have dynamic sound.
I did not listen to David system but I think his judgment about Stream vs CD is coming from a dynamic system. He has horn if i am not mistaken.

completely disagree. i have outlets next to my Equi=tech outlets that are direct to my home power grid. no isolation transformer at all. my Equi=tech outlets are much better in every respect. that is my personal experience. i am not alone in that conclusion, assuming there is proper headroom built into the isolation transformer. and not all isolation transformers are created equal.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Amir,

I don’t think that Peter article sheds any light on the topic of the thread. (Peter’s seemingly-structured analysis is shaky, as it is built only upon his personal preferences.)

 

[Gregadd]

Or, assuming one is happy to handle physical media, spend $20,000 on a DAC, $1,000 on a streamer, $4,000 on a CD transport, use the modest streaming set-up to explore and find new music, order a CD of the music you find, play the CD, and avoid all of the computer network complications and fussiness to “clean and recondition” the data that you now have residing in the CD.
What was the result?
PS: My numerous, and rapidly evolving, digital experiences the last few weeks, culminating in CD transport —> Lampizator Baltic 4, has created some appreciation for lowly Redbook CD. I am more understanding of Lloyd’s and Al’s policy decision than I used to be. The Baltic 4 changed a lot for me regarding digital. Could you elaborate on the change?

Ron
I am confused. Just my opinion. I would take my $200 iFi Audio Go-Blue dac/amp streaming across my smartphone and best most Redbook CD. You make it sound as though there is something "pure" about the CD. IME that has not been the case.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron
I am confused. Just my opinion. I would take my $200 iFi Audio Go-Blue dac/amp streaming across my smartphone and best most Redbook CD. You make it sound as though there is something "pure" about the CD. IME that has not been the case.

It is my opinion thus far, based on these limited experiments, that it is easier to get good sound from a modest DAC fed by a cheap CD player than it is to get good sound from that same DAC fed by a cheap streamer. (And CD certainly is easier to set up in the sense that one does not have to learn anything about computer networking and switches and stuff, which is anathema to me.)

 

[Gregadd]

It is my opinion thus far, based on these limited experiments, that it is easier to get good sound from a modest DAC fed by a cheap CD player than it is to get good sound from that same DAC fed by a cheap streamer. (And CD certainly is easier to set up in the sense that one does not have to learn anything about computer networking and switches and stuff, which is anathema to me.)

I have four dac/amps that are plug and play. Either across Wi- fi, or directly across my smartphone So when you say "easier", I am having trouble with that.

 

[bonzo75]

I have seen you use Isolation transformer if i am not mistaken. Even big Isolation transformers limit dynamics specially in bass. I think low impedance AC quality is very important to have dynamic sound.
I did not listen to David system but I think his judgment about Stream vs CD is coming from a dynamic system. He has horn if i am not mistaken.

Are we now qualifying this discussion with horns vs non-horns?

 

[tima]

some feed their server with wifi and claim that is great, mine is solid copper ethernet. in the past i have used a fibre optic break in the copper for lower noise but the technology has advanced from that approach mostly.

Thank you for taking a stab at my question.

Wi-Fi is convenient and sometimes there is no wire runs in older homes, but I agree that a wired network with wired connections to all signal recipients is optimal. Wired is faster just as synchronous is faster than asynchronous communications which require constant hand-shaking between devices. Of course the Internet is asynchronous. The Wi-Fi issue is mostly cast in terms of security. I don't think security is any more relevant to audio streaming than it is generally but wired networks tend to be more reliable.

I also use a cascade of switches, to filter, clean and retime the data stream. As the final stream is stored in and played from RAM, the extra latency plays no role, but the extra levels of filtering and clock refinement really help the final sound.

Thank you for the extensive follow-up! I will need to study your reply further, but in terms of hardware, it makes sense to me.

To each of you:

As noted, I picked up on the notion of "building a network that cleans and reconditions the incoming data stream". I agree that wide-band and high quality hardware is a key to succesful networking. No different for any other data communications such as commercial banking.

Not being engaged in audio streaming, where I started to wonder is what is the control reference for cleaning and reconditioning. Presumably the control reference is the original file or chunk of data that is at the streaming service provider which gets broken down into packets of information and transmitted to the streamer recipient. How can or does a streaming recipient know if the data received is the data sent? Quality hardware on the receiving end and protocol conformance between sender and receiver may help reduce loss. Ultimately the streaming service faces the same issue -- they get their data from somewhere else.

While the issue of data integrity is more profound in the digital realm, it is not entirely absent for analog. In the case of vinyl, the source, the LP, is at hand; assuming a clean record there is no error correction or data interpolation. Yet, as far as I know there is no method for determining if a stylus reads each ridge and valley in a record groove. One difference between the formats is analog has far fewer steps.

 

[Gregadd]

[text omitted]
["Wi-Fi is convenient and sometimes there is no wire runs in older homes, but I agree that a wired network with wired connections to all signal recipients is optimal. Wired is faster just as synchronous is faster than asynchronous communications which require constant hand-shaking between devices. Of course, the Internet is asynchronous. The Wi-Fi issue is mostly cast in terms of security. I don't think security is any more relevant to audio streaming than it is generally but wired networks tend to be more reliable."
Tima

While I think the quality of Wi-Fi exceeds merely being convenient, I think wired transfer via ethernet cable is the preferred means of transmission. Unfortunately, that is not an option for me. For those who can I agree wired is the preferred option.

 

[Blackmorec]

It is my opinion thus far, based on these limited experiments, that it is easier to get good sound from a modest DAC fed by a cheap CD player than it is to get good sound from that same DAC fed by a cheap streamer. (And CD certainly is easier to set up in the sense that one does not have to learn anything about computer networking and switches and stuff, which is anathema to me.)

I would say there’s a lot of truth in the above. Firstly the CDP uses a source component (the CD) to generate a data stream that goes straight into the DAC…..noise is going to come from the ‘built-for-audio’ CD transport, but that’s it, more or less. The cheap streaming is connected to the Internet and Network World and all its noise. There are multiple components each generating and transmitting their own noise, there’s network traffic, ground plane interference, plenty of network related interrupts and conflicts, parcel losses and the necessary error correction and re transmissions, inaccurate clocks, poor, noisy, non-audio optimised power supplies, loads of vibrational losses, the works.
Streaming is a ubiquitously noisy environment that was never developed, optimised or even tested for audio use. Having a poor, untreated streaming system connected to your hi-fi is so noisy and detrimental that it can even affect non-streaming media like vinyl, simply due to the amount of noise brought into the hi-fi. So pretty damning for streaming.
I hope you sensed a BUT coming?
But the main BENEFIT of streaming only comes when the user decides to do something about all that noise and inaccurate timing. In essence, that IS the benefit of streaming. The fact that it allows nearly ALL that noise and mis-timing to be addressed, by isolation, filtration and avoidance measures. And whenever that noise is removed, as long as its not repeated later on in the chain, the SQ improves. Predictably, musically, appreciably.
Imagine that at the end of your garden there’s a stinking bog. You can leave it, with its mosquitoes, weeds, mud, frogs, newts and snakes and simply stay away, OR you can decide to do something about it. And the more you do, the more beautiful it gets, until one day that bog is a beautiful reserve for rare reptiles, with a fresh water spring, exotic plants, maybe some fish and pathways so you can wander around and enjoy it. Instead of ruining the rest of your environment, it becomes an exotic asset and the highlight of your garden

So, bottom line. Streaming, like any other part of hi-fi needs work to make it sound good. The great thing is, the more work you do, the better it sounds. Ask head gardener Emile Bok, who despite achieving Extreme levels of SQ has yet to discover the SQ limits of improving local and remote streaming.

 

[Blackmorec]

I would just like to add a comment.
Wi-fi can be be as bad or good as you want, depending on the HW employed and the care with which it is applied. Typical ISP installations aren’t good, specifically built commercial systems are better and the very best is a ’built-for- audio’ installation where all aspects of noise and mis-timing are managed.

Optical can sound better or worse that wi-fi, again depending on how well set-up they both are. SQ is always a variable that depends on HW and topology. There’s no universal truth….just a big variable

Similarly ethernet direct wired may sound better or it may sound worse for exactly the same reasons. A thoughtlessly implemented wired connection that connects your hi-fi to a lot of conducted noise will almost certainly sound worse than a carefully, hi-fi optimised wi-fi installation, where noise amelioration was the goal.

Networking is exactly the same as any another branch of hi-fi. It needs some specific knowledge, expertise and purpose engineered HW and SW to get the best from it. Does that mean you need to be an IT professional? Well that helps IF at the same time you are an open minded audiophile who understands that the quality of a network’s physical layer has a major effect on SQ, otherwise it can well be a hindrance, as we see every day on these pages. But if the only reason you’re not thoroughly enjoying streaming is a lack of knowledge, just do a few tutorials….there’re loads available on this very internet and the stuff really isn’t that difficult once you’ve understood the basics. If all you want is sufficient knowledge to set up a really great audio streaming system it’s actually quite enjoyable..after all its our hobby.

 

[treitz3]

Then there is also the argument with using a router that communicates on a different band than Wi-Fi, effectively breaking the path of all of the noise upstream. I use a mesh network that does this and I am still hardwired from a satellite to the end user. Of course, everything is carefully optimized/configured upstream of the mesh network, as well as from the satellite to the NAP.

There are many different configurations to achieve getting rid of noise and optimizing the signal leading to the NAP. Experimenting, trying different configurations (gear, cables, LPS's, etc.) and ultimately, listening is part of the fun. To me, it's no different than setting up a TT for the ultimate playback. If you are starting out fresh with either one of them, there is much to learn.

Tom