SACD vs. 24/192 stream

I used to own N/A Eno streaming system. I ended up selling it as it negatively impacted the sound quality. It mellowed everything down and killed the dynamics. 
Never tried Muon but with your innuos zenith mk3 using any filter may not be necessary. They take care of isolating network garbage internally in the innuos. I’d try with and without. Ultimately only you can be the judge.

I use best possible Ethernet cables I can afford (yes they absolutely 100% matter) and no filter. I even removed iFi LAN iSilencer. Not necessary. I do have a switch (cheap trendnet 8 port 1g) between eero and streamer as I split the signal to go to streamer and roon nucleus. Again - no filters. 
 

Back to cables - please try DH Labs AES from innuous to dac. Do an apples to apples comparison. Eliminate the guesswork. Type of cable matters but quality natters more. Let us know. 
 

my network set up

eero 6e pro into trendnet switch using wireworld starlight 10 twinax Ethernet cables, then another starlight 10 into roon nucleus, and from switch to my Meitner MA3i streaming card I use Audience Hidden Treasure Ethernet cable. All network components are powered off a separate circuit. My system - dac, amp, phono, table are in two dedicated lines

SACDs can sound amazing, but so can 44.1 kHz CD.  As noted earlier, much depends on the mastering.  Is the 192/24 stream you're listening to the same as the one on the SACD?  Probably not.  Playing a 44.1 kHz CD in a good transport / DAC can sound amazing given the right source material and the quality of the playback chain and room.  Having said that, most of the SACDs I own sound incredible and if I had to choose over streaming, I would.

A direct A/B comparison of the (apparently) same recording on SACD using Marantz KI-Ruby player/DAC to Quboz hi-rez streaming using an Eversolo DMP-A10 streamer/DAC with identicale Cardas Clear RCA IC's from both players into integrated amp inputs (and leaving cables alone for a long time) - has revealed that on most albums the SACD has slightly more texture/detail in the sound (I use the CD if I own it). PS Audio has some wonderful quality recordings on SACD that really highlight a system.  However, SACD availability is limited and expensive for a small SQ difference - streaming 90+% of music and enjoy it!      

@big_greg 

You bring up a great point. At first when I am putting together an upgraded system, I tend to really listen to different copies of the same recording... different media and formats. One thing with my current system (where all the media... CD, Vinyl, stored files, and streaming natively sound the same. I have found that the mastering / recording is by far the greatest variable... the actual sampling rate or media is generally less important. So, the greatest variable is the recording and the rest tends to be much less important. 

Often but not always, good recordings are chosen to be presented in high resolution formats. You would think it would be always... but it is not. 

A couple of things to be aware of.

Many SACDs have been originally recorded in high-res formats so are not true Direct Stream Digital (DSD) recordings.  This conversion is not lossy - but it has to interpolate extra timing information.  I am thinking especially of Chandos.

Many DACs to not natively process DSD - they convert to high-res to feed R2R or similar architecture converters.  This conversion is lossy - it loses timing information

If you really want to explore the differences, visit 2L.no.  Many of their recordings come as packages with both SACD and Pure Audio Blu-ray disks.  The Pure Audio disks typically include several high-res formats, including 9-channel and Dolby Atmos.  The SACS include a CD layer, plus 2-channel and 5.x channel DSD.