Is it my streamer or does Audirvana sounds better?

If your using Audirvana on a laptop, then it’s running off of the battery, which could potentially make an improvement. Also, much depends on how your DAC was designed. In other words, the filtering within your DAC has a lot to do with the sound that your getting, despite what brand of renderer you happen to be using. And finally, Audirvana is a very good sounding software. I started using Audirvana when it first became available and continued using it for close to ten years. Some companies are now incorporating Audirvana into their streamers.

I’m always surprised that people can spend tens of thousands on a tt setup, amps, preamps, etc, then spend a few hundred $$$ on digital and complain why this digital setup doesn’t sound very good. If you buy a $1000 amp and compare it to your McIntosh 452 amp, I’m sure you will find there is a difference too. 
The 2 streamers you listed are entry level pieces. But I also think aurender stuff doesn’t sound as good as others so it’s not just money that determines what sounds good

rbstehno

I’m always surprised that people can spend tens of thousands on a tt setup, amps, preamps, etc, then spend a few hundred $$$ on digital and complain why this digital setup doesn’t sound very good.

That’s a common scenario but it doesn’t surprise me at all. There are plenty of folks (such as the ASR crowd) that trumpet "bits are bits" and that everything digital is error corrected and perfect. It’s not difficult to accept the "logic" in that belief ... until you hear for yourself that it’s nonsense.

I sounds better to me too, comparing it to Quboz Connect and Quboz via Roon to my Lumin P1. Not sure why it does or why it should but it sounds a little "cleaner", more clear, detailed but not bright. 

Who knows? The mysteries of digital I guess.