If you stream music from the internet, I can't recommend this more highly


I had been using a Roon Nucleus to stream Qobuz, with my Chord Qutest directly connected to the Nucleus. I thought I was getting pretty decent sound quality. And then I got a marketing email from Small Green Computer touting some of their optical gear. The basic idea is that normal cables and connections used to stream from the internet pick up noise of one kind or another (radio frequencies and electromagnetic something or other). But fiber optic cables and their connections/interfaces do not. I don’t know anything about anything, but it made theoretical sense to me, it wasn’t a huge amount of money ($1,400), and with a 30 day return policy I figured I could always return it if I didn’t hear any improvement. Well, I didn’t just hear a slight improvement; it was like turning on the lights in a dark room. Much greater clarity and detail, much better micro and macro dynamics, better timbre to acoustic instruments -- overall just more lifelike. Two quick examples: I’ve listened to some of Steely Dan’s top songs 100s of times over the course of my life, and this is the first time I’d ever noticed a particular and very subtle sound characteristic of Fagen’s keyboard in Babylon Sister. It’s hard to describe, but it’s like there’s a slight sound of air being exhaled by it. The other example: the specific timbre of whatever percussive instrument is used at the beginning of Copeland’s "Fanfare for the Common Man" (a recording by the Minnesota Orchestra). There’s more of a metallic sound than a drum skin sound to it that I didn’t know was there before. The metallic sound starts in the center and then projects out and to the sides, like a wave washing over you. Anyway, I’m just thrilled about having stumbled upon the whole "optical" thing and felt obligated to let others know about it. If you stream music over the internet, I highly recommend giving it a try. (The product I got was the opticalRendu, with the linear power supply option, and the Fiber Ethernet Converter Bundle option.)
Bef4c8e1 cb40 42e2 9cdb ab0a886edf23hiphiphan
Hi , didn’t read all trough, but  no one asked what is your entire system?
by the way I don’t like stream so much, I like to get up and flip record and look harder  for music I like . my personal thing 🙂 just saying 
krell_fan1:  Thanks!

cycles2:  andrew@smallgreencomputer.com
pophaudio:  Ansuz power distributor; Roon Nucleus; Chord Qutest; T+A integrated amp; secondhand Raidho D3.1s.  (And now, of course, the optical kit.)
If you're sending data via packets there is no need for reclocking with any somewhat confidently designed DAC. The dock generates its own local clock it gains no clocking information from the data connection.  Much of the claims for the so-called Network reclockers assumes that the person who did the dac is totally incompetent.   The claims that they make would be instantly evident and easily tested with a distortion plus noise across frequency plot.  If they can't provide you clear evidence of that sort then that's all they have is claims they don't have any evidence their product does anything.
$1,400 seems like a lot of money. I am old-school DIN 45500 educated person with 50+ yrs of audio experience and I have a nice arsenal of inexpensive/expensive gear. Money should be spent on loudspeakers, turntables, DAC's. And NOT on cables, power outlet conditioners and all the other (often snakeoily) gadgets, that might make 0.1% sq improvement. How does one measure the sq improvement/expense ratio anyways? 

If a $1,400 digital interface makes such a dramatic difference, then my first question would be, what else is wrong in this particular setup? "Wrong" might be too strong a word here, perhaps "mis-aligned" would be more polite. 

Going back to the original post, my second question is: What problems are you trying to solve with this $1,400 expense? 

Cheers and happy listening.