Streamers. What do they offer over a MAC or a PC?

[Plink]

I am having a hard time understand what the point is in regards to music streamers. Specifically, I am not understanding what a streamer does that a MAC/PC could not do and it appears that being locked down to one vendor's particular software is not a good thing.

 

Could anyone assist? Thanks.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Plink - Can you give an example of what you call a streamer? This will make sure we're all talking about the same thing.

 

[Plink]

Hi Chris, linn, naim, resolution audio, etc....some of these have a dac and some don't.

 

It seems I can do everything with just a Mac/pc and have control/freedom to choose different software.

 

Paul

 

[CharlyD]

The "streamers" you refer to all receive their content from a media server running on a networked computer or NAS. They also require a control point device for the user interface. This control point could be on a variety of platforms such as handheld internet device (e.g. iTouch/iPhone/iPad) or a computer. The key advantages of this architecture are that several clients can be served by a single server and there is no need for a general purpose computer in the listening room. Also, the control point can cause content to be played at any renderer on the network. From your iPhone you can shut down the Led Zeppelin in the family room and play Mozart in the bedroom. With the DLNA/UPnP standards, there is a variety of software that can be used for the server and control point elements of these systems (although I'm disappointed in the level of compliance in these parts).

 

TCP/IP is a reliable transfer protocol and, once you have a solid connection, you can be assured that the bits in the music file are correctly arriving at the rendering device. This behavior won't change with changes to the server or the underlying OS and certainly not with changes to the cabling or other infrastructure (routers and switches).

 

The codecs execute on the rendering device or, in the case of transcoding, at the server.

 

[Plink]

Hi CharlyD. Thanks. So if I interpret correctly, the advantages are that a general computer is not needed and variouw devices can be controllers. However, this wireless control can be set up in either system. And, I need a computer and NAS drives anyway. And one still needs DACs in every room for multiple room or in Linn's case, multiple D$ units

 

Seems like the streamer is the unnecessary middleman and you're locked into that company's software and apps. After all, the streamer in this case appears to be a specialized computer.

 

I am trying to understand how a streamer is not the unnecessary middleman.

 

[mikemercer]

Plink:

 

The first step towards sonic integrity, when it comes to having your computer/iTunes/WinAmp/WMA, whichever software you run - as your music source is to better the performance of the digital-to-analog conversion.

 

The internal DAC in the computer is not nearly as good as the one you may have in your CD deck for example (it doesn't make much sense either, for the computer companies to invest money in making the internal DACs better - as the majority of their buyers don't care).

 

There are MANY devices out there to help you in this, whether you're feeding one Hifi system or many rooms. When I was doing installs the Sonos system certainly made all this VERY easy.

 

 

 

[John]

1. No interface related jitter

2. Galvanic isolation from computers

3. Automatic sample rate detection and playback

4. Support of open standards (upnp, flac)

5. Aesthetic match to rest of hi-fi rack

 

- John.

 

[Audio_ELF]

Streamers can be looked at in various different ways...

 

First off, you have devices such as the Naim HDX and UnitiServe and Brystons forthcoming (BDP-1) product. These are not really streamers. They are custom built computers running a custom build of a full OS (Windows in Naim's case, Linux in the case of Bryston). Because they use custom hardware and software however, they are optimised for sound quality. Maybe no more than you could if you built (or customised) your own computer but it's all done for you. For example - the Naim UnitiServe with an SSD costs £2250. Next to a Mac Mini at £650 thats expensive - but add Amarra and a Weiss INT202 to the Mac Mini and replace the drive with an SSD and the prices become closer. In both cases you need an external DAC.

 

Next come true streamers. These would include Linn's DS range, Logitech's Squeezeboxes and anything else offering UPnP, etc. First and foremost, these remove any general purpose computer from your listening environment. This can be beneficial in terms of noise and potentially a streamer has lower EMI. The operating system in a streamer is also dedicated to a specific purpose so there is no messing around with Core Audio; WASAPI; selecting sample rates, etc. In many cases (i.e. Linn DS and Logitech Transporter) there is a high quality DAC built in (or the stremer is built into a DAC) so again that reduces complexity. There is also no need for any (GP) computer except to create the initial rips as streamers will work from a NAS device. Control is via a separate device (laptop, netbook or handheld/touchscreen).

 

They are two option, both have their place. Some will choose the simplicity of the streamer over the complexity of the computer. Others choose the versatility of the computer over the single-purpose of the streamer.

 

Eloise

 

[Audio_ELF]

Why use a streamer...

 

1. No interface related jitter.

Connected via FireWire or async USB equally low jitter (never say none/no in relation to jitter). A well designed SPDIF interface can also reduce jitter or the effects of jitter.

 

2. Galvanic isolation from computers.

Correctly implemented all DAC interfaces are galvanically isolated. To ensure it use optical connections.

 

3. Automatic sample rate detection and playback.

Can be implemented on a computer with the correct software / setup.

 

4. Support of open standards (upnp, flac)

UPnP while open standard often has problems where not all devices are quite as compatible as they should be. A computer supports FLAC, along with AIFF, WAV, AAC, Apple Lossless, ACE, WAVPack, WMA, etc., etc., etc. Along with (if you want it to) supporting video formats/playback too.

 

5. Aesthetic match to rest of hi-fi rack

Putting a Linn Akurate DS in a rack full of McIntosh amps is no more aesthetically pleasing than adding a Mac Mini (or Chris' Origin M10 built C.A.P.S) and Weiss DAC202 (for examples) to the same rack. Only if you have brand loyalty and that brand produces a good streamer do you get full aesthetic match.

 

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

Although what others said at this point in time is just true, maybe I can try to explain it more towards the real essence when it would come down to "do we need that middle man or not". So, here's my attempt (it's not all that easy to explain it clearly) :

 

A streamer is a device which is dedicated to "streaming" music from whatever source as data and it is NOT a sound device as how it could be seen by a computer. Moreover, a computer is not needed, unless software is running on it providing that data.

 

Data : Just file contents.

 

The opposite of a streamer would be an external soundcard or a USB/Firefire DAC, which *also* moves the music to itself, though not as data but as "music".

 

Music in this context : A special audio format of the same file, generally subject to jitter.

 

While it is certainly a characteristic of the music streamer that it is dealing with normal data only (which is not subject to jitter and which is a good thing), it's main characteristic is that it can't be played from a normal software player (like Foobar et al). This is NOT a virtue; You are completely dependend on the interface and control means supported (see the other posts), and you may even end up with the necessity to switch on the TV because the user interface only appears there (this completely depends on the brand of course).

Of course, the one offers more facilities than the other, but generally spoken a "PC" (or MAC) solution will be more "developed".

 

So what's the *real* use of the streamer ?

No feeding jitter.

 

But ...

Since about all streamers are cheap(ish) devices, never meant for the best playback possible (while "no jitter" is just part of "best playack" ...) - hence the DAC in there often is the worst, you will be tempted to connect an external DAC. Most streamers will allow for that, but most won't provide you with a 24/192 connection, and often you are stuck with 16/44.1/48.

 

But did you get it ? ... Connecting an external DAC to a streamer would be throwing away the virtue of the streamer itself ... the "not fed with jitter" part. Why ? because the streamer will feed the DAC with (more or less) the same jitter, which would otherwise be fed to the DAC when connected to the PC.

 

Aha. Now, what's left of the virtues of a streamer ?

Nothing much, unless it contains that superb DAC you always wanted.

And possibly some nice control features as explained in the other posts, unless they are not there at all.

But the streamer should be there for the best SQ, although no manufacturer takes it like that (but don't forget the NAIM's and such, which indirecly fit the description of "streamer", and which devices are there for their "DAC" capabilities).

 

One thing to add, before others do :

An asynchronous USB DAC (I skip the Firewire stuff here) does the very same ! It also streams music "data" as per my description. And, it does that for the explicit reason of avoiding incoming jitter. The one big difference with the streamer is : the PC is in complete control (although I know of at least one exception that needs a dedicated player, but which is still operating on the PC).

 

I hope it is more clear now !

Peter

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

Since about all streamers are cheap(ish) devices, never meant for the best playback possible (while "no jitter" is just part of "best playack" ...) - hence the DAC in there often is the worst, you will be tempted to connect an external DAC. Most streamers will allow for that, but most won't provide you with a 24/192 connection, and often you are stuck with 16/44.1/48.

Peter, when asked to define "streamers" the OP said he was considering devices such as Naim, Linn, Resolution Audio, etc. I think these have good DACs in them. Also the Linns all provide 24/192 and the Squeezebox touch and Transporter both 24/96 so I think your "limited to 16/44.1-48" is rather off the mark.

 

But did you get it ? ... Connecting an external DAC to a streamer would be throwing away the virtue of the streamer itself ... the "not fed with jitter" part. Why ? because the streamer will feed the DAC with (more or less) the same jitter, which would otherwise be fed to the DAC when connected to the PC.

It only throws away one element of the virtues of the streamer. You still have a nice looking silent device in your rack. The jitter of the SPDIF output is often pretty good on a streamer compared with the average computer output. And it's no worse than using a computer with any non-async DAC.

 

and... An asynchronous USB DAC (I skip the Firewire stuff here) does the very same ! It also streams music "data" as per my description. And, it does that for the explicit reason of avoiding incoming jitter. The one big difference with the streamer is : the PC is in complete control (although I know of at least one exception that needs a dedicated player, but which is still operating on the PC).

Sorry but isn't this incorrect. Computer to async device is the data already formatted as pure data. Computer (NAS) to streamer the data is still formatted as AIFF / WAV / FLAC as it's stored on the drive (or transcoded by the server software).

 

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

1. I read the OP for what the OPer wanted to know. Detail that down to better devices only is of not much use, if you (as you just did) imply that jitter of such and so kind doesn't matter much anyway. You only CONFUSE.

 

2. While you are able to mention streamers with 24/96, you forget that you also can mention streamers with 16/44.1 Btw, this includes the cheaper squeeze box. Heck, do you even know how many of these things are around ?

 

3. Oh boy ... So now we are going to get ourselves streamers because they are good looking, right ? Come one now. If you want points, don't try to get them this way.

 

also :

 

The jitter of the SPDIF output is often pretty good on a streamer compared with the average computer output.

 

Yes, but anyone getting SPDIF from a computer's mobo doesn't know what he is doing in the first place. Please ...

And besides, please get the message : this is about NO jitter. No discussion about the level of it possible.

But IF you want to discuss it, talk real levels please, and don't try to argue with the worst (like SPDIF from a mobo).

Again, you CONFUSE.

 

4. Your idea about the "data" passed with asynchronous communication is true, but totally besides the point. Remember, it is about jitter. Both mine and your "data" do not contain jitter - nor impeed for it.

And again, I don't see the reason for you to mention it, though what you said is true. You C......

 

Allright, let me add lastly that I tried to clarify things not because I want to know better, but because the posts so far didn't tell me anything on the REAL matters. But hey, if we really think that today's "audiophile" is about nicely fitting small cabinets in a superb rack, please go ahead.

 

Ok, that cleared my chest. Haha.

Apologizes for the kind of aggresiveness from my hand. Must be the superbad weather overhere. So to soften things hopefully : nothing you said is wrong, but it really doesn't help understanding IMHO. And that was the only reason for my post. Going down to all the details can be saved for other threads I think. Or for the remainder of this one, now all is hopefully more clear anyway.

 

Peter

(PS : I want mine deepsky blue :-)

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

What peter ... ignore all the cheep devices (which the OP clarified he wasn't asking about) while you ignore all the devices which DO have good DACs!! Again ... I didn't deny that a lot of streamers are limited to 16/44.1-48; just pointing out that many of them aren't limited!

 

Yes, to a lot of people appearance is important. And if you read my comments it was that the aesthetics only match in limited cases so was saying appearance is only limited importance. Though many people would be happy with a slim Linn or Naim box but not a full sized computer case on their rack. And my comment about appearance (in reply to you) was about additional qualities a streamer has (when used as SPDIF source) - it might not be an issue for you; but noise, appearance and complexity is an issue for some people.

 

Yes, you can get good jitter results out of a computer. But very often people don't go beyond the basic SPDIF output provided by their motherboard, or a basic USB interface. In these instances the SPDIF output of a good streamer (probably even a Squeezebox) is going to be at least as good or better than the computer. Again it depends on your comparison and what outputs you are discussing - I'm making one assumption you are making another. People who streamers are aimed at tend to be (and again this is a generalization) those who want a plug and play system and wont play around trying different async USB to SPDIF solutions or worrying if their DAC uses async USB.

 

If I confuse people I apologize, but actually I think you confuse people. In the real world for most audiophiles, they are not interested in devices which need countless tweaks. The majority of people need a system which is (a) within their budget; (b) allows easy access to their music and © fits in with their living environment. That doesn't preclude computers, but a lot of audiophiles are interested in Linn type streamers because they are able to get good sound quality with minimum effort - this is anecdotal from reading views of some of UKs leading dealers.

 

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

All well Eloise. One small thing :

 

while you ignore all the devices which DO have good DACs!!

 

I thought I made an explicit exception for those. But maybe that wasn't clear enough. It was this part :

 

(but don't forget the NAIM's and such, which indirecly fit the description of "streamer", and which devices are there for their "DAC" capabilities).

 

So, maybe if you missed that, my whole post will have been read in quite another context.

So, possibly suplerfluous for now :

 

Streamers are the best solution IMO, but they'd have to contain that DAC you want (for it's SQ capabilities). I think I said that too.

 

As always, nice talking to you. :-) (and sorry for my english)

Peter

 

[Audio_ELF]

Okay Peter you did say ... (but don't forget the NAIM's and such, which indirecly fit the description of "streamer", and which devices are there for their "DAC" capabilities). Many devices with good DACs don't "indirectly" fit the description. There are quite a few DACs now with streamer functionality built in - Resolution Audio Cantata Music Center and (forthcoming) PS Audio PWD with Bridge and that's not to mention the aforementioned Linn DS devices which are dedicated streamer with good DAC.

 

However that was rather divorced from your earlier statement... "Since about all streamers are cheap(ish) devices, never meant for the best playback possible (while "no jitter" is just part of "best playack" ...) - hence the DAC in there often is the worst, you will be tempted to connect an external DAC. Most streamers will allow for that, but most won't provide you with a 24/192 connection, and often you are stuck with 16/44.1/48." so please forgive me for not connecting the two paragraphs - your writing style is often difficult to follow.

 

On another note, writing about Naim in general terms is difficult as they have two completely different ways of dealing with "computer" audio for lower and high end. At the low end, yes they utilise a streamer in the form of UPnP compliant NaimUniti and UnitiQute. Their high end devices - the HDX and UnitiServe - I would describe as "audio computers" rather than streamers. The HDX and UnitiServe both work as stand-alone devices (the UnitiServe digital output only into a DAC) but also provide audio via UPnP server and NetStreams to other devices.

 

At the end of the day, what I'm trying to say is that streamers can provide a good alternative to a computer if that's what you want - a position you (Peter) seam to be trying to deny.

 

Eloise

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Peter said, "I hope it is more clear now !"

 

No offense Peter but I almost fell off my chair after reading your statement :~)

 

[Plink]

So we have a few camps here...(apologies for the generalities or if anything is incorrect):

 

All in one Streamer/Dacs: Linn, Resolution audio, etc...

 

These companies seem to conclude that one must put the computer/ethernet next to the Dac and all in one box. Probably the easiest to implement with the least flexibility?

 

Asynch Dacs: Wavelength, Weiss, Wyred, etc...

 

These companies seem to cater to those who are fine with connecting the computer to the Dac. They feel they have solved the jitter issue when directly connecting to a non-purpose built PC. Unlimited flexibility.

 

Non-Asynch Dacs: the best of which is probably Naim.

 

Naim feels that the Dac must be separated from the computer/ethernet for best performance. this means multiple boxes. for lower lines, they are fine with putting the Dac in the same box as the streamer (Uniti/Unitiqute). i guess we'll learn more from the upcoming announcement in September on a Streamer. maybe it will have a top dac in it. Little flexibility for Uniti line (Serve, Unitiqute, Uniti). Medium to high flexibility for the standalone Dac.

 

[Audio_ELF]

I think that's a pretty good summary "Plink". I might have to steal it at some point.

 

Of course some devices and companies fall into several camps and different methods of feeding them can provide different levels of SQ.

 

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

I think that's a pretty good summary "Plink".

 

I can't agree more Eloise.

Peter

 

[1975DCS]

I used an USB to optical out converter and I still kept hisses and pops on my DAC-20 in my Accuphase E-308 amp. Even with Foobar2000 and AISO driver.

 

I tried the Logitech Transporter and it sounded much better and no problems whatsoever and the bonus of easy to use with remote and no computer (noise) in your room.

 

It would have stayed if only the Accuphase DP-67 CD-player wasn't better. The Logitech sounded in the same level over it's analogue output as through the DAC-20. I really believe a midrange or highrange Linn could be a real surprise! Altough I would prefer Accuphase to come up with something equal!

 

[nrwatson]

The Linn Klimax is a real surprise well worth a gander (listen) I have been very impressed Had a visit to the factory the passion for music was palpable from the tea boy upwards

Neale

 

[ShanghaiT]

"Specifically, I am not understanding what a streamer does that a MAC/PC could not do and it appears that being locked down to one vendor's particular software is not a good thing."

 

Regarding your initial assumption on the software:

 

With the LINN products ( and probably other UPnP streamers ), you are not locked into a vendor's software. In fact, the beauty of the LINN products is that there are some very well executed programs from 3rd parties to control the units. ( currently using Chorus for my Ipad, Iphone )

 

After using a few external DACS being fed from my MAC and IMAC, I finally made the switch to the Streamer/NAS config and have zero regrets.

Aside from the above mentioned benefits from other posters, the sound quality coming from my Akurate is simply breathtaking. When I went to the store to choose my setup, I did a blind test, and was able to pick out the Akurate 3/3 times.

 

[roccoriley]

A "Streamer" is a consolidated solution to producing sound from digital files; kind of like a "Boombox" is to audiophile audio!

 

[ziggyzack]

Intuitively, to me at least, a streamer sounds like something which is sending out a stream (implicitly a stream of audio data, as we're talking about digital audio). I think that most of the time, when people talk about a streamer, they're talking about something which receives a stream and outputs analogue audio.

 

If you're listening to an internet radio station, it is sending out the stream, and the player is playing it. Just as a computer or a nas sends out a data stream to off-board dacs. So to call the box with the dac in it a 'streamer' is confusing to say the least, but that's the way the language seems to have evolved.

 

While any data transmission can be referred to as a stream, the word in the sense discussed here is rooted to a large extent in computer networking, so typically we're talking about a stream of audio data sent over a network, rather than over fw, usb or spdif.

 

As for flexibility - only with 'streamers' can you have a single music library, and many players. E.g. one computer or nas which stores the music library, a network around the house, and 'stream players' in the living room, bedroom, kitchen, patio, all connected to the network, all able to be controlled by any other device connected to the network (say an ipad). As long as the players, server software and control points are UPnP AV compatible, you can mix and match (but watch out, not all UPnP implementations are equal).

 

[CharlyD]

I agree that "streamer" is a crummy name. Wikipedia defines Streaming Media as:

Streaming media are multimedia that are constantly received by, and normally presented to, an end-user while being delivered by a streaming provider (the term "presented" is used in this article in a general sense that includes audio or video playback).

A DAC receiving its content from a computer via USB or firewire is receiving "Streaming Media", but, in the vocabulary being created for this hobby, such DACs are not "streamers".

 

UPnP/DLNA standards do a good job of defining the functions of all the system elements. See http://www.dlna.org/digital_living/how_it_works/. A networked device capable of receiving streamed content and converting that stream to analog is a Digital Media Renderer (DMR) or a Digital Media Player (DMP). A DMP provides a control UI while a DMR requires an external controller (Control Point).

 

For the more familiar architecture here, there are computers, players and DACs. The computer accesses the content through its file system and hosts the player. The player provides a User Interfcace, content directory services (allowing for searching content based on tags), decoding the content with the appropriate codec and outputting PCM content to the DAC. The DAc receives a stream of PCM data and converts it to analog.

 

Also, it's not correct that any data transmission is streaming. Streaming refers to continuous delivery (constantly received) while data transmission, in general, makes no requirement on data arriving in consistent intervals.