Differences in sound: DAC vs. DAC + Pre-amplifier

[Summit]

Barrows, I wished that high fidelity was as simple, predictable and “logical” as you believe it to be.

 

What most audiophile knows is that to get high fidelity sound is no simple task and never as simple as common sense and basic theories stipulate it to be.

[Summit]

On 3/23/2020 at 7:16 PM, barrows said:

If you have not read my previous posts, I have made the distinction of my preference for a system which is hi fidelity, which means transparent to the recording.  All of my other thoughts here are referenced ty that point of view.  Additionally, I have made no judgements about those who might have different preferences.  If you like SET amps, that is fine with me, if you like adding a preamp, that is also fine with me, your audio system is for your enjoyment (and hopefully that of your friends and family).  If one prefers a colored sound, rather than an accurate one, that is fine with me.   

 

I must say that you once again come off as condescending toward all those that have come to another conclusion about preferred ways to get high fidelity. It doesn’t really matter if you also says that you have made no judgments about those who might have different preferences, if you at the same time suggests that all other ways, but the ones that you approve, is a preference for a coloured sound. To say things like people that prefer the sound of a preamp/tubes etc prefers a colored sound rather than an accurate one, is IMO condescending and not necessarily correct.

 

I trust that most Audiophiles want high fidelity AND there are many ways to skin a cat. Sometimes it is with a preamp, sometimes it’s without. As always it depends on many things what’s best and that we have to choose which type of imperfection we can live with, because its nearly never about 100 % accurate vs coloured.

[Summit]

17 hours ago, barrows said:

Yeah well, my experience is the opposite, and there is also absolute zero technical evidence to support the above, in fact every technical metric points in the opposite direction.

 

No matter how ridiculously sophisticated a custom server is, it can NEVER have a noise profile which is as low as that of a properly designed and engineered Ethernet Renderer, it is just not possible.  So, if one prefers the sound of a server to the properly designed and implemented Ethernet renderer, the only logical conclusion that one can draw, is that one is preferring the noisier component, and the extra artifacts which the DAC produces when connected to the noisier component.

 

 

Can you show me evidence (measurements or listing evaluations) to support that Ethernet Renderer is better than SOTA server like Innuos Zenith se, Innuos Statement or Extreme?

 

Technical evidence I don’t know, but one principle I consider to be of great importance is that it’s better to attempt to NOT let the noise “come in” than to clean it up later down streams.

[Summit]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Your experience or that of a couple guys on another site?

 

Endpoints are best in my experience. 

 

Have you compared your preferred Endpoints to a SOTA server like Grimm Audio MU1, Innuos Statement or Extreme?

[Summit]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

Exactly, and by using Ethernet you keep noise from the server coming in.  Specifically, best practice is to use optical fiber Ethernet.  No matter what extremes one goes to trying to make a server as silent as possible, that server will never be as silent as well designed Renderer.  I suggest, that the better approach, is not bother about making the server silent.  Put it in another part of the home, and do not let its electrical noise to get to the audio system, by sending the music to the audio system over Ethernet (which is isolated by transformers), or even better, with optical fiber Ethernet (which does not pick up and carry electrical noise at all).

The the only noise which gets to the audio system is that generated locally, in the audio system.

 

There is another big advantage to Networked Audio as well:  You can do as much processing in the server as you may want, run room correction, for example, or much more sophisticated oversampling programs like HQPlayer (which can be a big sonic advantage, especially HQPlayer oversampling and a simple DAC which does no additional processing onboard, reducing noise in the DAC even further).  All this processing in the server makes a lot of noise, but by isolating the server away form the audio system, connected by only an optical fiber cable, the noise never gets to the audio system.  

 

I know and understand the theoretical advantage of Renderers. But theoretical advantage and practise is not always the same. I have no proof of it but I believe that if the digital signal has been polluted some noise will “ride” with the signal and it’s very hard (to some extent impossible) to get rid of.

 

My own experience has showed me that the sever matters with my uR and I have said it many times. I was one of the first to get a JCAT net board and to use LPS on my switch because of that.  

 

One more time, can you show me evidence (measurements or listing evaluations) to support that Ethernet Renderer is better than SOTA server like Innuos Zenith se, Innuos Statement or Extreme?

[Summit]

14 minutes ago, barrows said:

Indeed, and the working theory for why this is the case is that clock phase noise is the single issue here.  The Jcat NiC has a good clock, hence the improvement.  And of course you are referring to an electrical interface, where noise may propagate, so a low noise NiC is a good idea, and may improve performance.

With an optical fiber interface, general noise from the server does not get to the Renderer, that is just a physical reality.  But there is a theory (and only a theory, at this point unproven) that clock phase noise does travel with the signal.  I am still skeptical, as the implications seem to me to indicate that the Internet itself could not possibly work reliably if this were true...  But, perhaps the measurement system will be developed well enough to actually show that this can happen.  In the mean time, I do advise for using an upstream device with good clocking of the Ethernet data stream.

 

If an optical fiber interface would make the digital signal immune to all types of noise. A switch like the ones from UpTone would not make any difference, right? Have you tested an EtherREGEN? If not maybe Alex can lend you one .

[Summit]

52 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I've done some comparisons, but not with those exact models. That's why I made sure to note, "in my experience." I would love to compare more.

 

 

To me it’s clear after reading reviews and post by people that have first-hand experience with those servers, that they hold them as “sounding” better than all Ethernet Renderer.

 

I have no experience with any of them myself and find Ethernet Renderer together with a good server to be very good and much more affordable option.