Streamers vs PC

[master]

Sorry if like Rip Van Winkle, I have just awakened from a long sleep. But, I am not seeing any reason why I might be excited about the client/server streamer idea.

 

Snip...

 

Coming from a purely SQ perspective it has its advantages. I've used a 2 PC setup with the likes of JPlay, Daphile, MPD, etc. and the sonic advantages in terms of elimination of electrical noise alone makes it worth it. However, I understand that's not the Kool-Aid everybody wants to drink and that's perfectly fine too.

 

Now I've a different kind of multi PC setup... a central NAS (the hub) and multiple endpoints/renderers (anything from a $35 Chromecast Audio or Pi to a full blown $2000 AVR). At times I feel its a big jumbled mess, but its also a necessity for me personally. I can say the more pressing reason is how we consume media/music today. There is no longer a single source like LP, tape, or CD or at the most 2-3 sources like the above CD, FM radio, and satellite radio. Today the one big advantage is you can listen to a ton of stuff that you don't own and for free from so many sources. For the most part its 128 kbps or at the most 192 kbps, but its available for free and I myself consume a ton of classic rock from so many radio stations and streaming services. More importantly even with so much free music available - its not all available at a single source. No single device (maybe a PC could) can offer everything. I consume quite a bit of audio from my local NAS (FLAC rips), and then many online streams on that same NAS. Then quite a few on Chromecast Audio. But not all of it is available on them so something like a Pi with Moode and/or MinimServer lets me add custom stations. Last count I've over 70 such sources and that's actually less... I know folks with more sources in the jazz genre alone.

 

Unfortunately while the sources are multiple, most of us have at the most 1-2 audiophile grade setups at home. In that context a 2 PC or a NAS and a renderer based system becomes a necessity to collage all your sources together and then output them to a single set of amp + speakers. At least that's my thinking... till the day my smartphone can access everything and send it all to my DAC.

 

Of course some folks are happy with Spotify alone... or a couple of hundred LPs or CDs and that's fine too.

[firedog]

So is the mRendu a streamer?

 

Seems to me the actual term is renderer. It's just a playback conduit to a DAC. No processing on its own. But today streamer and renderer tend to be used interchangeably.

[Rexp]

Seems to me the actual term is renderer. It's just a playback conduit to a DAC. No processing on its own. But today streamer and renderer tend to be used interchangeably.

Found a reasonable definition on this site, which says in the server-renderer-control point definitions a renderer is either a PC or streamer and gives examples of streamers:

 

http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/DAP.htm

[davide256]

Coming from a purely SQ perspective it has its advantages. I've used a 2 PC setup with the likes of JPlay, Daphile, MPD, etc. and the sonic advantages in terms of elimination of electrical noise alone makes it worth it. However, I understand that's not the Kool-Aid everybody wants to drink and that's perfectly fine too.

 

Now I've a different kind of multi PC setup... a central NAS (the hub) and multiple endpoints/renderers (anything from a $35 Chromecast Audio or Pi to a full blown $2000 AVR). At times I feel its a big jumbled mess, but its also a necessity for me personally. I can say the more pressing reason is how we consume media/music today. There is no longer a single source like LP, tape, or CD or at the most 2-3 sources like the above CD, FM radio, and satellite radio. Today the one big advantage is you can listen to a ton of stuff that you don't own and for free from so many sources. For the most part its 128 kbps or at the most 192 kbps, but its available for free and I myself consume a ton of classic rock from so many radio stations and streaming services. More importantly even with so much free music available - its not all available at a single source. No single device (maybe a PC could) can offer everything. I consume quite a bit of audio from my local NAS (FLAC rips), and then many online streams on that same NAS. Then quite a few on Chromecast Audio. But not all of it is available on them so something like a Pi with Moode and/or MinimServer lets me add custom stations. Last count I've over 70 such sources and that's actually less... I know folks with more sources in the jazz genre alone.

 

Unfortunately while the sources are multiple, most of us have at the most 1-2 audiophile grade setups at home. In that context a 2 PC or a NAS and a renderer based system becomes a necessity to collage all your sources together and then output them to a single set of amp + speakers. At least that's my thinking... till the day my smartphone can access everything and send it all to my DAC.

 

Of course some folks are happy with Spotify alone... or a couple of hundred LPs or CDs and that's fine too.

 

It is nice to have 1 renderer that you can switch in software based on the streamer application you wanted to use. I spent about 2 days flipping back and forth between Foobar2000/UPNP, and HQPlayer /NAA before deciding that life was more livable with Foobar2000's GUI.

[Paul R]

Found a reasonable definition on this site, which says in the server-renderer-control point definitions a renderer is either a PC or streamer and gives examples of streamers:

 

http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/DAP.htm

 

The logic in that article is perhaps, a little bit specious.

 

Think of it like this- say you have an iPhone.

 

If you are reading and writing e-mail on it, it is a computer.

If you are talking on with a VoIP application or AV application like WebEx, it is an AV Computer.

If you are talking on it over the normal cell network, it is a phone.

If you are listening to music stored on the device, it is an audio player

If you are listening to say, Apple Music, Tidal, or Spotify on the device, it is a streamer.

...

 

It is always the same physical device, though perhaps with slightly variant software loads on it. (Different Apps for difference people.) Whether it is a streamer, a phone, a player, or a streamer is all dependent upon how you are using it at the moment.

 

Same is true for audiophile "streamers" or "players" or "computers." None of them are intrinsically better than the others, but each one has some device specific strong points when used a particular way.

 

Does that make it clearer? It is not *anything* like the difference between an Amp and a CD player, for instance. Perhaps more like the difference between mono blocks and an integrated amp, at the very most.

 

-Paul

[firedog]

The logic in that article is perhaps, a little bit specious.

 

Think of it like this- say you have an iPhone.

 

If you are reading and writing e-mail on it, it is a computer.

If you are talking on with a VoIP application or AV application like WebEx, it is an AV Computer.

If you are talking on it over the normal cell network, it is a phone.

If you are listening to music stored on the device, it is an audio player

If you are listening to say, Apple Music, Tidal, or Spotify on the device, it is a streamer.

...

 

It is always the same physical device, though perhaps with slightly variant software loads on it. (Different Apps for difference people.) Whether it is a streamer, a phone, a player, or a streamer is all dependent upon how you are using it at the moment.

 

Same is true for audiophile "streamers" or "players" or "computers." None of them are intrinsically better than the others, but each one has some device specific strong points when used a particular way.

 

Does that make it clearer? It is not *anything* like the difference between an Amp and a CD player, for instance. Perhaps more like the difference between mono blocks and an integrated amp, at the very most.

 

-Paul

 

I think his point of differentiating between a streamer and a renderer is that the streamers give you some control over the playback - choosing tunes, etc. The devices that don't give you that (like the mRendu, Rendu, Sonic Orbiter, etc.), he calls renderers.

[Cebolla]

Perhaps, though he still felt happy enough (in the context of gapless playback support) to quote my mention of the foo_upnp software UPnP renderer plugin for the fully controllable Foobar2000 music player application:

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/SW/Streaming/Gapless.htm

[master]

Seems to me the actual term is renderer. It's just a playback conduit to a DAC. No processing on its own. But today streamer and renderer tend to be used interchangeably.

 

Found a reasonable definition on this site, which says in the server-renderer-control point definitions a renderer is either a PC or streamer and gives examples of streamers:

 

http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/DAP.htm

 

Perhaps, though he still felt happy enough (in the context of gapless playback support) to quote my mention of the foo_upnp software UPnP renderer plugin for the fully controllable Foobar2000 music player application:

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/SW/Streaming/Gapless.htm

 

Actually in layman's terms its 3 devices...

 

1. The source/server.

2. The control point/remote.

3. The renderer/playback device.

 

However, a device can be two things (or more???) too. My mobile functions as a control point taking content from the NAS and sending to the renderer (or showing the renderer where the content is)... but it can also act as source at the same time if playing files stored on it or via the likes of Tidal (via the BubbleUPnP app).

 

Guess that's my noob version of understanding and explaining it.

[Miska]

Foobar2000 with the foo_upnp plugin. MinimServer's transcoder is able to use SoX. So some UPnP media server developers are certainly thinking along those lines.

 

Still don't fill the requirement list. And how do you configure those to do different stuff depending on where the playback is going? If you are listening in room A, you want digital loudspeaker cross-overs and room correction (also for DSD material) for that room and speakers (8-channel output at DSD256), but not if you are listening with headphones there, then you may want to have headphone 3D processing. And if you are listening in room B through DAC X you want upsampling to DSD512 while if you are listening in same room through DAC Y you want upsampling to 768k PCM, but both with the same room specific digital room correction.

 

And what would you use as a renderer to handle that? That cheap and resource constrained one that was supposed to be fine for it?

 

And because UPnP uses HTTP as content transfer protocol, it is completely braindead for seeking back and forth.

 

IMO, better way to handle such cases is to use NAA/RAVENNA/RAAT style network audio endpoints instead.

[Miska]

Perhaps, though he still felt happy enough (in the context of gapless playback support) to quote my mention of the foo_upnp software UPnP renderer plugin for the fully controllable Foobar2000 music player application:

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/SW/Streaming/Gapless.htm

 

Good thing I can do gapless UPnP playback even if the control point doesn't support gapless. IOW, without SetNextAVTransport (or such server tricks).

[lmitche]

My Intel NUC based PC/HQPlayer "streamer" is running on suitably customized Linux (Debian Stretch based). Brief instructions for the setup are on my web page too. It doesn't really run anything unnecessary. I've been working on so many different Linux-based devices (mobile phones, etc) over time, that I believe I know how to build one.

Hi Jussi,

 

I am looking for the instructions you reference above for building a Debian Stretch based image for HQplayer. Can you provide a reference please?

 

Thanks,

 

Larry

[Miska]

I am looking for the instructions you reference above for building a Debian Stretch based image for HQplayer. Can you provide a reference please?

 

See "Running the renderer as headless background task" here:

Signalyst - Installing HQPlayer Embedded

 

Sure it is not detailed, just a quick dump of how I did it. "linux-image-rt-amd64" package is optional extra and it is not all the time available in Debian repo and sometimes doesn't work properly, so you can skip it at the beginning and add later on. (reminds me that I should update tlm package to the latest version)

[lmitche]

Many thanks!!!

[Rexp]

The logic in that article is perhaps, a little bit specious.

 

 

Same is true for audiophile "streamers" or "players" or "computers." None of them are intrinsically better than the others, but each one has some device specific strong points when used a particular way.

 

Does that make it clearer? It is not *anything* like the difference between an Amp and a CD player, for instance. Perhaps more like the difference between mono blocks and an integrated amp, at the very most.

 

-Paul

If you believe this, why are you on Computer Audiophile?

[Paul R]

If you believe this, why are you on Computer Audiophile?

 

If you do not believe it, why are you on CA instead of some foo-foo audio enhancer site full of magical electrocream and sparkly little crystals?

 

Honestly - if you are looking for magic because someone stuffed a COTs PC board in a pretty box, you are going to be both disappointed and constantly raiding your savings.

 

By the way, if you think selective quoting - as you did in the post this is in reply to - is a clever discussion tool - please think again. It is just plain rude. It also does bot work very well.

 

What do I really think about audiophile streamers?

[Cebolla]

Good thing I can do gapless UPnP playback even if the control point doesn't support gapless. IOW, without SetNextAVTransport (or such server tricks).

The SetNextAVTransportURI action is actually an interaction only between control point and renderer, so doesn't involve the server at all, 'trick' or otherwise. Ironically, you've happened upon one of the few things where the renderer is doing some processing, so not so braindead after all

[thuandb]

I have just done the streamer vs PC comparison.

 

I have a dedicated PC which I use as a music server. It has an i5 3570k processor, 8GB of RAM, a fanless 400w seasonic PSU, a 3TB hard drive and 120GB SSD, no GPU and runs Windows 10, using JRMC and Tidal for playback. I also use a Yellowtec PUC2 USB/SPDIF interface powered by a Teddy Pardo PSU. The PC is housed in a Fractal Node 304 case and all fans run below 500rpm and are inaudible.

 

I recently bought an Auralic Aries - the full version with femtoclocks and linear PSU - and stream over ethernet from a server in a different part of the house.

 

After comparing the two, the PC wins. The PC sounds denser, more colourful, more detailed, sweeter, with blacker backgrounds and more depth. The differences are small, but noticeable.

 

But note that this is a comparison of one PC against one specific streamer. I have also recently tried using a small, fanless NUC type of PC, streaming over ethernet, but using the same USB converter. I tried this because I wanted to save space on my rack (same reason I tried the streamer). It sounded duller and less colourful than the more powerful PC, so I went back to the PC. Based on my recollection, I think the streamer sounds marginally better than the NUC, although I haven't done the comparison directly.

 

The takeout from this is that it is possible to put together a PC based system that sounds noticeably better than a highly regarded streamer such as the Auralic Aries. Mine does, and it has no special "audiophile" components, other than the linear PSU powered USB/SPDIF interface.

 

Having not tried a dedicated streamer but having enjoyed a single then a dual PC setup, I really appreciate your sharing of your experience.

[christoffeldg]

Honestly the purpose of a dedicated streamer makes little sense to me, the digital chain will never lose or add data if the source is lossless. What gets put in, whether it's a streamer, CD or a PC to your HDMI cable doesn't matter until the conversion happens in the DAC which is usually your amplifier. It's only from this part on the audio processing chain that noise can enter the signal.

 

Unless of course we are talking about DACs in PCs or streamers that there is an actual advantage.

 

EDIT: Just noticed I necroed this thread, it was a top search result on google on the subject hence I got here.

[botrytis]

Honestly the purpose of a dedicated streamer makes little sense to me, the digital chain will never lose or add data if the source is lossless. What gets put in, whether it's a streamer, CD or a PC to your HDMI cable doesn't matter until the conversion happens in the DAC which is usually your amplifier. It's only from this part on the audio processing chain that noise can enter the signal.

 

Unless of course we are talking about DACs in PCs or streamers that there is an actual advantage.

 

EDIT: Just noticed I necroed this thread, it was a top search result on google on the subject hence I got here.

 

A streamer is just a dedicated PC, many of them use Intel Atom or other SOI chips and use dedicated Linux OS's. Many have included pre-amp controls so they can act that way.

[NipperDog]

I just started reading through this thread and I have a very basic question. 

 

When you're talking about a PC in the context of this thread, are you referring to a Windows based personal computer as opposed to a Mac computer or do you mean personal computer in the generic sense.