2. digital
  3. 153736-138624

Why stream?

OK, I've been around the low end of the high end for 40 years, but the learning curve for digital audio has been steep. Needing a better DAC, I acquired a Cambridge 851N and started streaming. Yeah, this device is now Tidal-friendly. But Tidal streams at 44.1kHz, while Cambridge plays everything from USB -- Tidal, Spotify, Pandora Radio, iTunes library -- at 96kHz. Last night I used Spotify to find and play obscure old stuff listed on cassette tapes I made from 1975-1989. The sound (better amplification and speakers now, of course) was revelatory. Rather than exposing a thousand flaws, in most cases the Cambridge DAC/USB found unsuspected delights in these old (NON-remastered) recordings.

So, my question is simply: why stream when you get better sound from USB? I know Qobuz does 96, but no way it can match my library, and it can't beat USB from Spotify, which found every selection except one obscurity from De Danann, which I probably mistyped anyhow. 
hickamore
lalitk's avatar
lalitk
5,055 posts
 
One more thing, also compare the streaming over WiFi vs wired connection to your Cambridge Streamer / DAC. Many here, including myself found hard wired connection sounded more dynamic and cleaner.  
mike_in_nc
1,121 posts
 
Most DACs sound a bit different through their difference inputs, and streaming DACs are no exception. Which input will sound better depends not only on the DAC design, but also on the component feeding the DAC and, some say, the cables. So it would not be wise to decide what system structure is superior in general, based on one DAC in one system.
hickamore OP
523 posts
 
lalitk, I agree, USB, as you say, more dynamic and cleaner than WiFi. mike, will definitely test other variables like running CD through Cambridge into preamp Aux. Macbook Pro with Jitterbug is the source for USB and all WiFi. May also mount TV above and run optical to the main system, so all Cambridge digital inputs will be tested. 
More to discover