Why in some instances does changing streamers makes a bigger difference?

@tyray theres no clear agreement on which is better, I2S or USB.

What is clear is that I2S isn't standardized between devices whereas USB is. 

It all comes down to the quality of the buffering and ground loop isolation, IMHO.  

The thing streamers must do extremely well is buffer up to several seconds of input which may or may not arrive in order or on time and provide a monotonous (literally mono-tonic) output regardless.  If they can do that well regardless of the type of input stream you have succeeded. 

@davide256,

I will take your comment(s) under consideration but I’m glad I found out that an asynchronous USB cable is a viable alternative to using a I2S cable with the purpose of taking advantage of and getting high quality usage from the USB input on a DAC.

As I had assumed that an I2S connection is better than a USB connection, which now I know, may not always be the case, even if you have a custom built I2S cable.

@tyray if you do try USB, I recommend buying 2 half meter cables and an Intona USB isolator. You would think that unnecessary between good gear but between an Innuos Pulse and Holo Spring 3, I find the Intona reduces USB irritants.

I watched the video and learned quite a few things. However, while it all made sense to me (based on my limited tech knowledge), I think it also might be fair to question if he is the definitive resource on why or why not there may be differences in the sound of streamers. Again - it all made sense to me.

In my own systems, I have T+A’s HV series DACs which are well regarded - and have built in streaming clients.  I currently source the DACs using their streaming client (though the G2 software leave a LOT to be desired).

As part of this story - I previously had the T+A DAC 200 (wonderful DAC!) sourced by the Auralic Aries G2 and Sirius processor before i upgraded the DAC. I tried the Auralic stack into the HV DAC (both USB and AES/EBU) and preferred the built in streaming client. In that comparison, the built in streaming client was a bit more transparent and information rich.

And yet, I am considering upgrading to a better streamer in one of my systems (likely an XACT S1 Evo). I won’t do so without an audition, but the T+A dealer acknowledges a performance gain at that level. 

It would stand to reason that the streaming client solution built in (fed by Ethernet with good hygiene) would have every advantage over an outboard streamer - would it not? 

Let me reiterate - I haven’t yet auditioned this solution as I’m attending to other issues (my room). But, if it is true there are differences, then perhaps the content author is directionally correct, but there may still be more to the story for some higher end streamers.  I plan to find out.