i know many don’t rate it - but it might be worth trying wifi to avoid ethernet noise (or maybe NDS doesn’t have wifi?)
May sound like a silly question, but you have configured the Tidal Input (on the NDS) to the correct bitrate? There is a setting there to configure the “Quality”, e.g. low, normal and high, which you must set depending on your subscription level to Tidal. e.g. if the default “out of the box” setting on the NDS’s Tidal Input was “low”, but your Tidal subscription was the highest, it will still only stream with the lowest bitrate. You need to set the Quality setting to what you want the streamer to process.
Its an interesting point, but what would be the advantage of setting the quality to anything other than high, even with an incoming low bitrate?
It has taken me a long time to get streaming, via qobuz in my case, to the level of local files. To get there I had to pay as much attention to cables and noise as I did with the rest of the system so I have an Ansuz switch and ethernet cables and everything set up properly. You have a fabulous system and there’s no reason why qobuz or tidal shouldn’t sound amazing on it but you’ll need to invest in it to get it there
4 Likes
I assume the reason for having the option were possibly that (in the olden days when these early streamers came out) you might have a hifi Tidal subscription, but have a poor network in your home. Setting it to a lower setting on the device would allow you to still stream using your Tidal subscription without any dropouts? In a similar way that most of the mobile streaming apps (that I’ve used) have the option to set the bitrate for mobile data (and also possibly wifi)?
You are probably correct, in that I can’t see any reason why someone would not just always set things to the highest and then turn down if you have problems, but the thing I can’t remember, is if by default that setting is at the lowest and you have to manually go in and change it. If someone has never gone in to the Tidal settings before, the setting therefore may not be at the level you desire…
1 Like
So tweaks made to your LAN improved streams from a remote server more than they improved them from a local server on your LAN?
Providing the album being streamed is being streamed at CD quality & is the same as the album I’ve ripped I can’t tell the difference on my system. HiRes can sound better or worse but always sounds different. I’ve spent nothing on fancy cables. I use whatever Naim/Linn etc put in the box. I don’t think hifi needs to be as complicated as it sometimes seems to be on here. I’m not saying things can’t be improved by spending money on accessories just suggesting it really doesn’t require so much effort to sound great. Interestingly my dealer got tired of the endless cable round and always says there’s no point buying more than NACA5 with Naim amps.
6 Likes
I found the difference to be much more pronounced on 1st gen streamers. Still noticeable on an NDX2, but when I had an NDX I was much more inclined to use local streaming.
1 Like
Another vote here for Audirvana. I have been using it for a decade, and have never ever found any difference between local and streamed versions (Qobuz) of the same master file. That all sound good. Audirvana has been running on a Mac mini and deals with all the packet, rendering and presentation issues, providing a PCM stream to the DAC/upnp point over the local network. You can then just make sure the local network between Mac and hi-fi is optimised, though personally I wouldn’t go too far (108E and PS is fine). This solution has worked for me from DAC only, to a Devialet 250 and now an NSC222. All good.
2 Likes
I use local streaming for 2 reasons: 1. It’s easier to search my own collection of 3k CDs than the millions on Qobuz. 2. 500 or so of my CDs aren’t on Qobuz or aren’t on in their entirety.
I went through a spell where I stopped buying CDs thinking why waste money when the music’s on Qobuz but, like many, I like owning physical music, I like shopping for it and I like it when a new CD arrives on the doormat. And it helps the artists of course. Other than the reasons mentioned I could happily live with streaming (and vinyl which I’d really miss although, if I’d never had it I doubt I’d start buying it, as good as it is).
4 Likes
Streaming is still not as good as local storage.
1 Like
It’s the endpoint (the streamer in this case) that reorders the Ethernet packets
Transmission devices such as routers and switches don’t know the significance of the data in the packets, so just pass them on as received.
I’ve added an Ifi NeoStream to use as a streamer into the NDS which is now being used solely as a DAC. Allows me to stream Qobuz, but also Roon which can play all my local discs , Qobuz, Tidal, and radio stations (thus avoiding the recent Naim loss of service). Comes with an “Optibox” which isolates the streamer electrically from the router. Also has its own internal DAC should my NDS ever be out of service.
3 Likes
Fixing packet order is a required function of the standard TCP/IP-based network stack. The receiving NIC handles this, i.e. the network interface component in the streamer.
2 Likes
Thanks for confirming.
…. in your system or in absolute terms?
With my NDX2/XPSDR streaming Qobuz sounds every bit as good as local storage (both served by Roon running ROCK on an Intel NUC).
5 Likes
In my and many others systems.
Put the files on a USB stick ,an easy way to hear the difference.
I’ve done that in the past. It wasn’t better, but I also have the latest streaming platform which is significantly better than the original.
2 Likes