Can Streamed Music Sound Better than any other source?


I am about to make the leap. Jumping into a Server or is it a Streamer? To use existing DAC-Oppo 203- or upgrade? I love the concept of access to all the music on line. So I don't actually own any of it-thats fine. Buying downloads adds up quickly. $20/month sounds like a bargain.  Roon's system looks appealing. I can add Tidal and be done, right? I get a lot of great counsel from my old school expert at the HiFi store I support locally but he can't even spell stream.
I was born in the 50's and want to use this listening option now. As this technology is still evolving, I am not inclined to overspend on gear that may be as valuable as a VCR in a year or two.
In the end I want to know if I can have this new source sounding better than CDs and LPs. I am not going back to reel-to-reel so if that is best source, please ignore it as it regards my purposes.
Thank you. I look forward to learning from the responses!!
128x128firstnot

Showing 4 responses by jim204

I love my streaming so much that I haven't touched my Gryphon CD player in almost a year and yes the sound quality is just as good as CD in my opinion. I user my PC which I built for the pupose and I have lots of jitter busting progams on it to make it super smooth going into a modified Oppo Sonica DAC. I use Quobuz as most of the other sreamers have a very limited Classical selection so they to me have about the best selection availlable. If you are not technically minded then I would suggest a server as it is purpose built for the job. I think Roon would be a good decision for you as it has great sound quallity and if classical music is not your bag then something like Tidal would be ideal for you.
I would say that is a matter of opinion as one who has given up turntables and never looked back. My pal has a turntable that cost with arm and cartridge over £40.000 and at a tenth of that price I am listening to 24/96 streams that are every bit as detailled as his and not a tenth of the bother.
Yes I would heartily agree about the quality of the BBC broadcasts as being beautifully clean and dynamic and most probably the best radio recording and broadcasts going. In I think 2016 they broadcast the Proms in 16/48khz flac and also binaural sound which was absolutely stunning but they said it was a one off but I really hope enough people e-mail them so they will relent and maybe start doing limited concerts again.
@gawdblessYes I heartily agree about the streaming abilities of the BBC but they are using the most quality that they are allowed by the EU ( maybe we'll get our airwaves back after Brexit ) . They already put out two streams for people to sample 128 and 320 kbps .flv files and really they are rather good as I have often been thrilled by the quality of some of their Mahler and Richard Strauss broadcasts. Do remember that quality also comes from mike placement and the BBC go for the simplest for the task in hand and I have attended concerts that were recorded for later broadcast and all they used for the recording was a crossed pair and a spot for the soloist. later they would broadcast it and it was a very believable acoustic and superb sound.
I laughed at your bit about the luvies and to a point I have to agree but there is one thing that burns up the license fee more which is the exorbitant fees that they pay these vacuous and extremely loud airheads in these awfull soaps that Brittain gets flooded with every night. I think the watchword for these idiots is who can shout the loudest. One of the latest and greatest who can hardly string a sentance together and co hosts a Saturday night dancing contest fo about 15 episodes gets £440.000 for that alone. No the license fee is dribbled away by the programs where the worse that you are at acting the better you are paid.