2. digital
  3. 154736-117322

Streamer v DAC - which is more important?

I know there have been other posts on this topic but I decided to add my recent experience. I have used a Cambridge Audio CXN but as I have indicated in previous posts, while happy with the SQ, I am totally frustrated with the apps. I recently bought an Auris BluMeHD for use with my second system but decided to ditch the CXN and hooked up the Auris to my Pure Audio Lotus 5 DAC which allowed me to use the Tidal app ( also very poor but better than the Cambridge apps).  Now either I'm going mad or my hearing is defective ( which my audiologist friend would likely dispute) but I could hear no difference between the $95 Auris and the $1000 CXN when played through the external DAC. This leads me to believe that the DAC is way more important than the streamer, unless perhaps you spend mega bucks on the streamer. Has anyone else experimented comparing a cheap streamer with a more expensive one when played via the same external DAC?
128x128mazian
rbstehno
1,401 posts
 
The biggest flaw in any setup is using usb for a number of reasons:
usb is flawed and that’s why you see many many tweaks/gadgets to try to make it better;

if you use usb/toslink/coax, then it requires you to place the computer (streamers are just a computer) in the audio room which isn’t a good idea for many reasons;

get the best fpga based dac that has a network interface and use an existing computer running Roon and you will have a nice sounding system without all the bs/hype that goes with separate streamers. The dac is the more critical piece to get right
mtraesbo
46 posts
 
Adding a view on user interface. Agree many Apps are bad and native Tidal is much better. However, I started using Roon and that is nice interface and lots of additional information. Tidal is embedded into Roon. 
oddiofyl's avatar
oddiofyl
3,450 posts
 
DACs went out of fashion a while back....   and now they are one of hottest categories of hardware discussion and sales.   I've been using a DAC since the late eighties for good reason,  they handle multiple digital sources and often sound better than one box solutions.  Now with streaming and archived digital files theres never been a better time to buy a DAC.   Im using a NAD M51 DAC with several digital sources including a Bluesound Vault 2i and it sounds awesome.    Movies, bluray audio, files on my HD...  all sound better through the DAC.   
relaks
63 posts
 
"Having a high quality stand alone DAC is worth every penny paid."
pgcollie just nailed it. I made some costly mistakes in my system building before realising this. 
mgrif104
327 posts
 
I’ll add my $.02.  I’ve posed this very question to myself and elsewhere in these forums.  I don’t have an answer in which I’m confident - I don’t know which is the more important.  They both are.  

I have multiple systems, and own a Node 2, an Aurender N100H and an Auralic Aries G2 to serve each. I’ve had a chance to compare all three streamers going into the same DAC - and they all sound different.  Not radically different as I would note that the difference is presented primarily in spatial information.  The tonality is the same, but the better streamers sound significantly more “open”.  The Node 2 is excellent for its price, but sounds “flat” dimensionally in comparison - even when connected via a Nordost Heimdahl digital cable (more expensive than the Node 2).  

I also ran all three streamers into a different DAC. Same result. I still don’t know which is more important - I’m guessing the DAC, but am unsure. But, let me also suggest that those who believe certain DACs eliminate or are immune to jitter (the inference being that a good source/streamer is irrelevant) may be missing something.  As has been stated elsewhere - everything makes a difference.  Unfortunately, this has been exaggerated as I’ve improved my system.  Pairing a state of the art DAC with a budget streamer, or vice versa, would be a mistake in my view.

Stay safe out there.
mgrif
More to discover