$$$$$$bits sound better than $bits which follows the rule that $$$$cable sounds better than $cable, which is itself a corollary to $$$$$equipment sounds better than $equipment.
4 Likes
I’ll take that as a joke. Being an ‘objectivist’ simply means believing in science. One probably needs only complete middle school for that. Otherwise, it would take degrees in celestial mechanics, calculus, propulsion systems etc. to believe in Moon landing; in quantum physics, standard model etc. to believe in elementary particles; in astrophysics, optics, signal processing etc. to believe the first picture of a black hole is genuine; and so on.
Has anyone ever? (There are probably precious few exceptions.) This kind of argument is completely irrelevant. It’s not ok to let conspiracy theories run rampant just to avoid inconveniencing ignorance or deception. Besides, it’s a public forum, nobody needs special invitation, or degrees.
3 Likes
In which case all of these discussions have as much value as arguing whether strawberry ice-cream is better than vanilla.
If we are trying to discuss actual facts though, it’s a different matter.
To be honest, those looked much more like some strawmen you had constructed.
Well, I guess you could tell them that painting their Nucleuses pink, with bright-orange polka dots would bring better sound, too. This would be entertasining, if anything, but is it the right thing to do?
Well, again, there is a difference. Measurements reflect the physical reality. If you get the same signal at the speaker terminals, the sound is the same, regardless of whether the bits had psassed through audiohile Cat 7 
cables and power had passed through a directional audiophile fuse or not. Perception is something completely different… Nevertheless, people who perceive that Napoleon talks to them and tells them to do things, no matter how sincere they are in their belief, are hauled off to asylums.
I wonder who are you referring to here, because that’s absolutely not what a certain site that is sure to cause a lot of tooth-gnashing here does…
Preferences are subjective. Presence or absence of difference is not.
Ah, I see there is now a 4 hour response delay. When you’re a hammer, everything looks like nail.
What this dialog seems not to address is the practical difficulty of actually comparing a CD to a streaming track:
—first one has to be sure that the CD is the same exact release as that served by the streaming service. A different master, even a slightly different gain setting, will be enough to tilt a listening test.
–second, one should use the exact equipment topology and configuration to listen: that means, at the very least one should be using the same DAC input and output for both signals.
That may be difficult if one is using the USB input on their DAC for the streamer and a S/PDIF input for the CD player or transport - I am not aware of a lot of transports that are USB hosts. And since different digital inputs on a DAC may perform differently (different gain perhaps even if bits are bits) then the signal should travel exactly the same path as from the digital output on the CD player and from the streamer (and it is often the case that S/PDIF outputs from computers are suboptimal…so using a computer for both isn’t anywhere near a quality test environment - for one thing, you have to know how to avoid the OS mixer!). That is not easy to set up, and an A/B test with digital cable swapping means delay, that is also a challenge in terms of sound comparison.
And if you are just listening to the CD player analog output, you’ve already screwed up any semblance of a scientific test.
By the way, someone above commented that they had done a test by uploading a music file to a newsgroup and then downloading it and comparing the original with the download. This is not testing streaming quality. This only tests file integrity. They didn’t need to listen - a checksum or other file comparison would have been sufficient to establish that the file was reassembled properly through the mime-encoding etc.
With respect, and I do not mean to be harsh, but this helps illustrate how people try to apply analog logic to digital sound reproduction which is one of the main reasons audiophiles are vulnerable to digital snake oil.
Finally, my opinion on the debate about preference/subjectivity/“it’s a hobby let me be happy” versus the scientific approach. Fine if you want to post that “I just bought this digital doodad and I am really happy with the purchase!” but please do not imply that the digital doodad has any science behind it or that it actually represents an improvement. There are lots of newbs out there that read this stuff and then believe they have to have the digital doodad to optimize sound.
Unless that improvement has been scientifically established, the onus is on the non-scientific poster to provide proper evidence, not opinion, not sighted listening tests, not marketing speak from manufacturers, that the doodad makes a real difference. That will be hard if not impossible to do because those with engineering knowledge understand how effectively impossible that conclusion really is.
3 Likes
You can make 100% sure you’re listening to the same bits (e.g. by capturing the bits during streaming and burning them to a CD). You can also use a streamer with S/PDIF output (or build one using a Pi and a HAT), so that you can use the same DAC input. However, the most difficult part is making the test blind; without that, you’re not doing it right.
(But then again, it’s just a waste of time anyway. It’d be more fun dropping cannon balls from the leaning tower of Pisa to see which one hits the ground first.)
It is an attitude I support, but in case of audio and sound quality not an easy one. You need basic technical understanding to apply scientific knowledge, you need essential practical experience to understand the outcome and most of relevant questions have never been subject to reliable scientific research. And on top you have a wild situation with who says what and people naming their methods and websites ´science´ which are among the most dogmatic and unscientific.
The irony of this particular case regarding identical bitstreams from CD or streaming, is that it is probably the easiest one to understand and accept a proof that bits are bits.
That’s how the type of audiophiles we are discussing here is seeing things, yes. Trying to discuss facts with them, even if you and me agree on them and the underlying proof, is senseless.
I was more referring to understanding their deeper needs and leading them to a positive outcome. I mean, why do people believe such stuff? My guess would be they are striving for superiority when it comes to their system, for individuality and they want some boys´ toys to play around with (Apologies to all audiophiles I am not doing justice with this blunt estimation!).
So my approach would be to bring them actual knowledge and listening enjoyment alike. Teach them how to position loudspeakers, apply room treatment and optimize EQ without measurements. If they want toys, try REW and some mics. If they want fun, try to make them understand why a subwoofer might be a good idea. Or teach them basics of room acoustics.
In my understanding, this is far more likely to make people reflect their ´digital delusions´ maybe coming to some understanding that a CD transport is not as relevant, than naming them conspiracy theorists.
As mentioned, the initial topic is a rare case in which absence of differences can be proven and the proof accepted by people with basic knowledge. Other cases are far more complicated.
You are 100% correct. I did the testing I outlined above, as I stated, over 15 years ago when file based audio playback was still rather new, and the audiophiles all had their panties in bunch over FLAC versus WAV and things like file integrity and the “sound” of different storage mediums (such as gold versus silver CDs). I also agree that it is not the perfect test for comparing the sound of streaming versus disk based playback. I occasionally see posts from individuals new to streaming that mention some of these now thoroughly debunked misconceptions (a nice way of saying “myths”). Let’s call them zombie myths since they refuse to stay dead.
One thing that hasn’t been discussed thus far is if there is a difference between the sound of streaming versus disk based playback is does that difference lead to better or worse sound or just slightly different sound?
Moderator edit: Off topic comments split out … please continue the discussion in the new topic …
I like to think I have a highly resolving system (as in, I over spent on HiFi).
Years back (before roon) I compared CD + NAS + Streamer together with my son changing the inputs (yes each was level matched) The CD player was a Tag Mclaren DVD32R as a transport. I could not tell the different between the streamer and CD played…. And sold the DVD32R. The Streamer sounded better than the NAS, but even that was marginal-ish. You do not need to spend a huge amount on CD players as a transport.
So, set my sights on Streamers… I know that streamers make a difference with/inc. a good DDC section. They are not night & day either.
For me streaming all the way …
They don’t.
2 Likes
That is a very known problem but finally there is a cure for it. Ifi will be coming very soon with a very good working solution. Here is a word from one of their developers.
4 Likes
Well at least AI understands the needs of audiophiles!
2 Likes
Perceive, not hear. Can’t hear what’s not there.
2 Likes
they do … I have also built 4 at different price points. What I will say is you do not need to spend a huge sum to get great performance. RPi3 into a DAC vs $3,500 streamer into a DAC are not the same in EQ for example.
They are, if the DAC is the same.
3 Likes
I disagree.
1 Like
Here in Blighty its called Fibre…
I notice no ‘wonder improvements’ with my Full Fibre network…
I have the benefit of being able to switch my Roon Core between copper and fibre - it runs from a Synology Rackstation, and with an 802.3ad LAG set up, I can unplug either transmission mode and continue to stream uninterrupted.
Unsurprisingly, there’s no difference.
People waste huge amounts of time and money on stuff that makes no audible difference, where a modest investment of time and money into room acoustics and DSP yield literally night and day differences.
I’ve stopped arguing with subjectivists - recent experience has taught me, quite literally, that life is too short to waste it on fruitless endeavours.
7 Likes
Which makes that “stuff” gold for the high end audio industry.
What do you mean you can’t hear the very obvious difference? Well that must be due to your inferior audio playback system and we have just the thing to help you fix that.
4 Likes