Where do I start\upgrade online streamer

[Flo]

I stream via BT`Router ,Ethernet out wired to dac , where can I tweak upgrade. Not a area of hifi I’m used to. Thanks

[AJSki2fly]

I stream via BT`Router ,Ethernet out wired to dac , where can I tweak upgrade. Not a area of hifi I’m used to. Thanks

My understanding is that "Owners of the original Nyquist can field-upgrade to Mk II standard by simply exchanging modules", that is if yours is the mk1. Having said that from what I see your Streaming DAC is right up there in the SQ front anyway. see https://www.brinkmann-audio.de/main.php?prod=nyquist&lang=en

If you are referring to the BT Router and cable specifically, then I think you could source a high end commercial adsl/switch/router, but this would require you to configure it as required by the provider. You would need to check that your provider (I presume BT) allows non proprietary ADSL routers to connect to their services. With respect to the Ethernet cable then go for a high grade CAT6 or CAT7.

Personally I am not sure you would actually hear any difference if you went to this extreme.

[Flo]

Thanks, nyquist is mark ii, have got some mycorde Ethernet cable cable and gave it a clean power feed which has helped was curious about router switch stuff, someone posed same question to me.

[Bencat]

If you are at all worried that the BT Router is going to be a cause of additional noise on your network (which is very unlikely) then you can fit a cheap 8 port digital switch whihc will connect to your router using a single port input from the Wan output of your router then your network can be connected to the switch . This will seperate the network and prevent noise . There are of course as is always the case audiophile versions of these switches which can cost anyhting up to £2000 but they are not really needed . A sensible £30 units from Netgear or similar will be perfect . In my experience which is not huge there was no change at all in sound quality (and I was not expecting this) but the solidity and consistency of my network was improved which was what i was looking for .

[Flo]

I’m told the Bt router is one of better ones, I will prob change wallwart p/s for something by ifi, I was asked by friend about switches, curious as found tidal masters stream noisy and screechy, tbh internet radio better. Was going to try something by Cisco or similar.
Ta for advice, I’m a digital tourist (not a native) so on a steep learning curve.

[Edward]

I found using a SOTM ethernet cable with the inline filter block just before my streamer gave a useful increase in 'naturalness'. This without loss of detail or transparency. YMMV of course.

§

[Duckworp]

I recently went down a digital path for the first time. Interestingly I also have a Vitus/Boenicke combo. I found the following improved the sound:
- installing a cheap ebay-sourced Cisco switch connected to the router The network bridge connects to the switch.
- improving the power supply to the network bridge (I have a separate network bridge feeding a separate dac)
- upgrading Ethernet cable between router and switch, and between switch and network bridge, from cat 5 to cat 8.
- adding an external clock to the network bridge
- improving the USB cable connecting the bridge to the DAC. You won’t have this if your dac is also a bridge.

After reading your other post I will next buy the ifi power supply you recommended for the router.

[StingRay]

I don't think the BT router is that good but better ones are about £180. Mine works ok now since I had BT engineer fix the cabling to my house. Sound quality has not changed. You could try the iFi power supply, I would get one that you can return if it has no benefit. Tidal sounds fine and so does Deezer, Qobuz and Amazon.

Have you tried Qobuz?

Not convinced about ethernet cables, have you seen the cables that bring the signal into your house?

[Flo]

Has anyone noticed that qubuz and tidal sound different. Qubuz clearer, ie less distortion, tidal more musical. This at standard quality, not hi res.
Bits are not just bits?

[StingRay]

Has anyone noticed that qubuz and tidal sound different. Qubuz clearer, ie less distortion, tidal more musical. This at standard quality, not hi res.
Bits are not just bits?

No I did not but I did not have them at the same time to do side by side comparisons. I would try to make sure you are comparing exactly the same master. On Tidal I can't fully open the MQA files as my DAC is not a MQA compatible one. Only using Amazon HD at the moment, may try Qobuz again but quite a few albums I like are missing compared to Tidal/Spotify/Deezer.

[Flo]

Ps, I tried two Ethernet cables, melco and MeiCord, sounded radically different, melco soft and sweet, MeiCord leaner quicker more energy. If in doubt try on tv, people tend to believe their eyes.
Yes I’ve thought the bell wire feeding house is rubbish, but signal we value is the one that comes after router, switch, and clock. Ie after the signal is potentially rebuilt in same way as a CD players error correction does. My dac has a five second buffer on Ethernet to aid signal.

[Mr. C]

To be honest, I feel neither really get close what is happening with FBA, to me Qoboz has a odd way of reconstructing the PCM data like it's deliberately been polished and manipulated to sound very hifi and some of the remixed albums sound truly wrong, that said if you like to FM then it is a quantum leap above that for sure.

Tidal never like it, again its like the use there own MQA :eek: (Music Quashing Algorithm) this translates to the Tidal sound which again for myself is not correct. I am not saying it is not a step up from FM or internet radio, it is no question. However for myself and a great a many of our customers the word 'contrived' is very apt :rolleyes:

I have four of the subscription services, but only use one on a regular basis usually when I am working on new designs for thoughtful sessions :lol:

Spotify premium, no it's not the same detail level or resolution, however it remains more faithful to the original master than the others plus the remastered albums do not sound so phish as the other two I have mentioned. Just some thoughts

[Edward]

I wonder if the perceived sound quality differences between the streaming services is partly due to the different ways they deal with normalisation? LUFS and true peak level and all that malarkey.

[Mr. C]

HI Edward

I personally feel it is the digital PCM reconstruction algorithm that each company employs to pack/unpack the data stream at the tx and rx points is the key here.

Currently I know of a couple of hard core stream heads (digital equivalent to vinyl nuts) who think nothing of dropping five figures just on the info-structure of the home network before it enters the streaming device. They firmly believe it makes a difference.

Still feel streaming has quite a way to go before it can get close to FBA.

[Edward]

Hi Tony

That interesting. I had assumed that the streaming services did not muck around with the files they received from record companies other than normalisation (and possibly addition of Metadata). Do you have some further details on what they do? A link? Genuinely interested.

As an experiment I'm going to try do a comparison between local files and equivalent streaming tracks. I'll skip any MQA stuff, just compare Redbook vs Redbook. I only have Tidal.

Meantime hope you are well.

E

§

[Mr. C]

Hi Edward

I am well thank you if seriously busy!

If everything was equal, then all of the streaming services would sound the same (at each frequency reproduction point), but they do not, like a lot of high end hifi equipment they all have a house sound. imho

So far I have yet to hear anything that convinces me otherwise regarding FBA, Qoboz on the sample highest rate doesn't get close to a quality red-book file playback locally.

Hint:- if you are using SSD via sata then you have a long way to go, but it still sounds better than any of the streaming services even with Ethernet regenerators, clocks extra power supplies and super routes and switches. Plus you are just renting music you do not own it

However for discovering new music then yes unbeatable, but once you have found the those new artists, obtain the the files used to make those recordings then decide.

I use Spotify maybe 15 hours a week, my critical listening are files only, my stored collection is up to 0.6 petabytes on a dual custom built server. However I do appreciate that most people will love the convenience of streaming. Luckily I have both convenience and sound quality.

If you would like a demonstration on files Vs streaming from mild to wild no problem at all, have now found the 'lost 8dB' in the amplifiers so now sporting a solid 122dB noise floor.

[Duckworp]

If everything was equal, then all of the streaming services would sound the same (at each frequency reproduction point), but they do not, like a lot of high end hifi equipment they all have a house sound. imho

So far I have yet to hear anything that convinces me otherwise regarding FBA, Qoboz on the sample highest rate doesn't get close to a quality red-book file playback locally.


I run a music streaming service, though not on the tech side, and From my knowledge the files that the streaming services receive from the record companies are streamed as the files as received and stored. We don’t alter the files in any way.

From a listening point of view I have spent a long time trying to get Qobuz to sound as good as my CD transport or files delivered from my hard drive. I have finally achieved this. The fact that you have not yet got there means One of two things: either your transport (from cd drive or hard drive) is better than my arrangement, or you Qobuz streaming set up is poorer. Difficult to know which but it would be interesting to find out.

For me Qobuz comes via a Modem and router with a lps on the latter. Then to a Cisco switch via cat 8 cable. From there via Cat 8 to a SOtM network bridge with a separate clock from SOtM, both powered via an SOtM power supply. From here via a friend's bespoke USB cable (He is an electronic engineer who makes astonishingly good home made usb cables) to a Vitus DAC. This sounds as good as a CD played from the Vitus transport to the same DAC. But it took a lot of effort and messing about to get to that point.

[Mr. C]

From a listening point of view I have spent a long time trying to get Qobuz to sound as good as my CD transport or files delivered from my hard drive. I have finally achieved this. The fact that you have not yet got there means One of two things: either your transport (from cd drive or hard drive) is better than my arrangement, or you Qobuz streaming set up is poorer. Difficult to know which but it would be interesting to find out.


Hello Peter

Thank you for your reply always interesting to hear other peoples experiences regarding streaming.

Let me run through a few items that maybe of interest for you:-

For the streaming side of our set up the incoming Ethernet data side I have constructed the following set up:-

A bespoke 4G mobile router (which just feeds the streamer only and is located very close to the streaming device), which I have made internal improvements and upgrades. This is fed by one of our ultra quiet QP-1 power supplies to a bespoke Ethernet re clocking device, which is also fed by a QP-1.

These are sat on dedicated isolation devices, Ethernet cabling is by Crystal Absolute dream RJ45 0.75m cables (2 off) this enters the streaming device.
Both RJ45 signal conditioner and re-clocking device are slaved via a Mutec Ref 10 SE-120 which I have further enhanced, cabling is our own BD range.

All of these devices are connected via systems main grounding (0 volt) system. All of the incoming mains power has been treated via 28 point filtration system and runs our BD cabling on mains power before entering any mains powered device.

The pcm audio data leaves the streaming device via AES67 (which is imho the best method of digital audio data transfer currently I believe) Yes I have worked with I2s over HDMI, currently working on a better RJ45 method, taking some time though I will get there!

Having over 15 years of experience with high speed digital data systems (up to 40Gb/s data rates so but our experience is not just audio Peter) We also have two recording studios in our portfolio as well

USB is absolutely not the way to pass audio data at it best possible integrity rate, it is not the data rate per say plenty there up to 480Mb/s usb II but the phase and latency errors that are indicative of the USB II methodology). USB is used as there are so many usb devices in the world today, companies would daft not to fit it) However make no mistake not the most idea method of digital audio data transmission.This is why so many usb helping devices are available on the market at the moment. YMMV.

This then feeds a Mutec MC3+usb re-clocking device (digital audio signals this time) again powered by a QP-1 power supply, Again this is slaved via the Ref 10 SE-120 master clock with a phase noise of -120dbc @1hz dropping to -172dbc @100Khz, So basically the 10Mhz reference word clock is rather good. Then the AES67 audio output to the TAD dac.

So the incoming Ethernet signal is as clean and quiet as I can make it currently and is totally separate and isolated from any other internet traffic in the building, it is purely used streamer control and incoming streaming audio data only.

I am not saying you can't obtain a good sound form Qoboz et al and I have heard it match a reasonable CD player once or twice now, but I am talking locally stored files only. Not supplied via wifi or a NAS drive, but on board isolated drives.

This is my experience thus far with streaming services has been so,so. Always happy to introduced to new ways no problem at all.

Just a thought for you, streaming has to be transmitted from point a to point b could be many 100's or 1000's of miles between these points or maybe 5?. The infrastructure between these points is not 100% loss less, BEFORE it gets to the router, then we have all the issues there after (not saying these cannot be addressed however) but at each stage errors will happen, hence why you box 'x' or cable 'y' to counter act them

A quality streamer I (not expensive), with isolated ssd drives with ultra short circuit pathways, minimal transmission lines with equal master files at what ever sample rate with have less distance to travel, incur less electrical and mechanical disturbances and require less hardware to deliver superior SQ.

Especially now with the the new PCIe express methodology coming into play we are talking AI levels of data transfer via the new lane transfer protocols. So very large data transfer rates over ultra short distances with little more than very low nv ripple noise and much lower power consumption it is exciting times we are now living in!

A side note here we have a fiber optical 300Meg pipeline available, what ever I do it just doesn't sound as good as the mobile router.

Now getting the files, now that's another story!

[Duckworp]

Wow, your system sounds v.complex. So with both of our systems we are getting Qobuz to sound as good as CD. In my system the CD transport and DAC are in one unit, the Vitus SCD025. This same DAC is accessed via a USB input from the SOtM bridge. Despite all the issues you mention (the hundreds of miles of cable, the inherent problems of USB, the noise generated by routers, bridges, power supplies etc) the fact that this 'damaged' file is sounding as good for me and you as the one generated from the silver disc in the same box as the DAC is nothing short of extraordinary.

What I think you are therefore saying is that, ignoring streaming services now, there is then a further leap in SQ when you move from a CD transport to a locally stored file. I source my files from a hard drive attached to an NUC dedicated roon core (a roon nucleus in all but name). This then supplies the files to my Cisco switch and from there via 10m of Cat 8 to my Hi-Fi room to the SOtM bridge with its external clock, then via short USB to the DAC. The SQ from these files is identical to CD and Qobuz. You are saying, I think, that the SQ of this should be better. I have tried attaching the hard drive directly to the SOtM but it sounds the same. What are you doing to make a local file sound better than a CD, through the same DAC obs?

[Mr. C]

Good Morning Peter,

Thank you for your reply.



Wow, your system sounds v.complex. So with both of our systems we are getting Qobuz to sound as good as CD. In my system the CD transport and DAC are in one unit, the Vitus SCD025. This same DAC is accessed via a USB input from the SOtM bridge. Despite all the issues you mention (the hundreds of miles of cable, the inherent problems of USB, the noise generated by routers, bridges, power supplies etc) the fact that this 'damaged' file is sounding as good for me and you as the one generated from the silver disc in the same box as the DAC is nothing short of extraordinary.

This performance availability has been around for a long time. correct copied CD files *will always sound better than the originals* providing you keep the signal pathway clean and use a suitable so called bit perfect software facility. Respectable equipment and a good clean mains supply.

If we take CD in basic form we are shinning a light on a spinning disc and using the reflections to extract the optical information as binary digital data then convert the optical to electrical use a Reed Salomon error correction code to iron out this mis reads of the pits and lands of the disc.
Yes better transport mechanisms, clocking circuitry, power supplies and memory players all improve things no end. However you cannot get away from the fact you a shinning a light on a spinning disc each time. In the same way with vinyl you are dragging a rock around a piece of plastic and all that entails.

Once you have extracted the data from the CD or obtained a master file red-book copy or greater resolution item and store this on SSD locally, each time you playback a file you have the digital data already in its format available without having to convert light to electrical each time you listen.



What I think you are therefore saying is that, ignoring streaming services now, there is then a further leap in SQ when you move from a CD transport to a locally stored file. I source my files from a hard drive attached to an NUC dedicated roon core (a roon nucleus in all but name). This then supplies the files to my Cisco switch and from there via 10m of Cat 8 to my Hi-Fi room to the SOtM bridge with its external clock, then via short USB to the DAC. The SQ from these files is identical to CD and Qobuz. You are saying, I think, that the SQ of this should be better. I have tried attaching the hard drive directly to the SOtM but it sounds the same. What are you doing to make a local file sound better than a CD, through the same DAC obs?

Personally I have not been listening to CD for close to 15 years, we demonstrate CD's regularly and on certain equipment they can sound rather good.

Not doing anything different with the files Peter I promise!

Think of data transfer from the point of source some 12m's away and how much connectivity it goes through. When you connected your hard drive
to the SotM unit was it via USB or RJ45? was the HDD powered via wall wart or quality LPS? Was it on the same supply that power your digital front end?

I could show you how much internal (and external) electrical noise a SoTM unit makes (and many other manufacturers ) on our test equipment suite we have here and how this impacts all SQ along with other issues you would need to address.

Part of our company profile we design high end audio digital electronics and streaming devices for other manufacturers so we have good grounding in digital audio playback abilities.

If you would like to hear what is REALLY possible from digital playback then do get in contact and we will happily take the time to show and explain to you no problem.

Regards

Tony

[Flo]

Wow, offhand query about platforms and this flood of really useful stuff appears.
Personally listen to a lot or radio on fm and ether, keep notes of stuff I like listen again on tidal then buy cd or Lp.
Haven’t yet heard a platform that is faithful to original, must try mobile wireless router again, local broadband sucks.

[Discopants]

Laurie you have some very nice gear in your system. If you can hear differences in ethernet cable inputs to your DAC, then I’m sure you would be delighted if you tried an improved network switch.

Uptone audio etherregen can be trialled at home for 30 days no quibble returns. One of the 2 biggest improvements to sound quality in my streaming rig. I’ve improved it even further with a well designed linear power supply and a boutique fuse. Ive had some network stability issues about 6 months after I put this in the system and that all went away and I got another improvement in SQ by putting another network switch infront of it and using that for the apple TV connection. This switch is a Cisco2960 8 port fanless model that i picked up 2nd hand on ebay for £40.

Then I changed my ethernet cabling between the switch and my power DAC from chord C stream to AQ Vodka and could not hear any clear differences in SQ immediately. I thought i could hear an improvement the next day but it was subtle and possibly imagined


The Cisco switch was one of the first that was getting internet fora debate with users noting improvements in their rigs SQ.

Computer audiophile forums have much content in this space, you get the odd distractors from networking engineers saying its just 1s and zeros and its all psycho acoustics who never actually give these things a try. Trust me improvements in streaming can be significant and easy to hear.

I have a Chinese radio hams OXCO clock salvaged from 4g masts that cost me £90, its a project that needs a few tweaks still but this is another cost effective improvement reported by users of the etherregen. You can also chain the cisco to the etherregen with a fibre optic link to improve electrical isolation even further. Less esoteric more hifi options are available too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Discopants]

Some guys even chain 3 switches together and report improvements, its a veritable rabbit hole [emoji235] [emoji874]....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Flo]

Am saving for a switch, may try mobile broadband router to test mr c assertion that it avoids a lot of cable related probs.