yes, yes it is:
If there are other non-signal things (the opposite of signal being “noise”) transferring along the analog line that the digital signal sits on, then it doesn’t matter how noisey that analog is, the digital is will either be good or corrupt, but it will not change fidelity.
I pretty much describe you two (@Speed_Racer and @killdozer) here:
Mostly right, but there’s nothing young about this “bits are bits” guy 
That’s good news! I’m only at 65 hours as I am using a slow roast with generous power conditioning, rather than a quick burn.
You are assuming the device that receives the digital data correctly cannot be affected negatively by the “non-signal things”. That is not a reasonable assumption. If a DAC is the receiving device those “non-signal things” could negatively impact the analog signal coming out of the DAC and reduce fidelity.
It is if the team that design and build the DAC are competent. Buying a DAC that requires its input signals “enhanced” is akin to purchasing a car that then requires you to buy “better road”. Instead just buy a car/DAC that’s fit for purpose.
Taking a digital input and converting it to a hi-fidelity, noise free analogue signal is effectively the product brief for a DAC. The devices you’re worrying about simply don’t satisfy “MUST” requirements.
Late observation to this remark.
Case settled ? Not for me - or let’s say I do not buy into a solution whereby what a progress, you need now 2 computers and a DAC to listen to music ? Can claim a good DAC does not cost much when you also need two computers on top of it… That’s the type of need that makes people still love their plain simple CD-player. Not forgetting that the switching power supplies of computers typically pollute the power lines, lots of fun then playing around with power line conditioners etc…
Agree with killdozer here, bits are bits and all that, but not all bits are created equal. Better source files make everything sound better on every system. These digital streaming services serve up their brittle sterile sounding files and Roon uses DSP to dither and thither the sound to be smoothed out, but hey, if you audiophile then just play it raw brah. Personally qobuz or teedaldeedal without Roon sounds about the same to me as with Roon (any version) raw. So WTF just give some high-res ‘192 khz/32 bit floating point’ files made from a quality vinyl system a try and you’ll cry in your Streaming Services Roon soup “I’ am missing out big time” LOL! Laughing and Crying it’s the same release…play on drummer keep 'em in line killer! Bit-Depth Expansion Rules
Ok. Enough beer for today 
Hmm, is that an audio comment about bit-depth expansion? Honestly all I see are comments about how much better sounding 24-bit/SACD sounds on these forums, but 32 bit is (noticeably) much, much better sounding; floating point is even a bit better than that!
Not to be confused with DSP processed 64/32 bit, file-based 32 bit strictly speaking.
no… you need a “music server”, the Core, and you need a networked DAC.
Nucleus w/ Roon Ready DAC or IntegratedAMP
if you don’t want Nucleus, there are alternatives, including the free ROCK and others even more expensive.
If you don’t want Roon Ready, anything Chromecast is also great.
No noisy busy computers that require maintenance needed at all.
Amazing how these discussions flow without memory of what was said 1.5 month ago only, and even in the same thread, on the same topics. The threads tend to work exactly like for if most it were essential to say something on day D but apparently not even useful to read what others have argued before with some interesting findings and convergence points on day D-45!
Filtering out discussion noise and side jokes is not so difficult, after all, some are even funny…
About resampling to higher sampling rates for example, letting apart the fact that some said-to-be HiRes file available online are really not so interesting or well recorded or mastered, there are reasons to resample to 192 kHz and above.
———————-
And an even simpler reason for high resampling is the interest of low slope / high frequency cutoff for antialiasing filters, to avoid ripple effects in the audio band, that can go quite low.
There also from this thread, this excellent talk brought in later (Feb. 18th) in the discussion.
Ripple effect shown on a 100 Hz fundamental signal…
You can’t quote Joni without acknowledging you are…
Also quoted Jimi so now who’s what?
Ok Thanks for the tip. I have seen the Nucleus solution I never heard a Nucleus or Chromecast. Once pandemic is over it will be easier to investigate…
To be frank I am still preoccupied by these issues of HF noise from most power supplies used in digital equipment. For quite some time: I remember comparing 15 years ago a Wadia iPhone connector with my Rosita streamer (the first one looking like a flying saucer). Surprisingly they sounded alike, until I redid the comparison unplugging the power supply of the Wadia. Then the Rosita came back with a better, fluider and more analog-like sound.
I missed the “Play on”. Wonder if anyone else picked up on your Lyrics? I’ve been listening to Joni and Jimi for close to 50 years…been twisten fatties for slightly longer …
that tells me your DAC should be better shielded from being affected by a bad power supply.
Your company’s own documents tell people that the best sound quality is obtained by using the Roon Core/Roon Endpoint model. Now you are saying that is all a lie?
Yes, I believe in shielding.
On the Neutron Star DAC I am using, shielding is part of the implementation.
huh? I suggested a Nucleus + Roon Ready DAC.
What did you you think I said that was against the idea of separation of Roon Core and Roon Endpoint?
