External DAC with Connect

Also, there's more to a dac than a simple dac chip. One other point of concern is the analog output stage and how well that is built.
Of course. The better built ones probably measure better too. The question is - does all of this translate into better sound quality that can be identified in a level matched DBT in as high a resolving system as one wishes to use to test for this if the resolving power of the ears/brain combination is going to be the limiter? If it can't be so identified, what is the benefit of the better build/measured performance? And why pay more for it, or provide more space for it?

However, I think if you were to be exposed to more of the good gear out there, you may have a different opinion. I think for the average joe, looking to dump his cdp in exchange for streaming will find unless he gets a good dac in the mix, he may be disappointed with the SQ he gets.
I think that the average joe, who may find the Connect to be expensive enough on its own compared to a modern CDP, may also like to hear from someone like me that has over fifteen years exposure to digital source kit costing a few multiples of Connect, to the effect that the Connect was found perfectly capable of replacing all said digital kit with no sound quality difference found in a level matched DBT. Those on the other hand that think that the Connect is too cheap to sound good are free to pursue their different path:)
Indeed, the average joe would be best served using Sonos play units and bypassing this question completely!

To each his own obviously, but if you want better sound you have to throw your hat in the ring and experiment some. There are those who simply are satisfied with what they have and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

There are also those who seek better sound, and a bang for their buck. This is why we have variety in audio gear, in anything really. The world would be dull with one product for all.

To each his own obviously, but if you want better sound you have to throw your hat in the ring and experiment some. There are those who simply are satisfied with what they have and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

There are also those who seek better sound, and a bang for their buck. This is why we have variety in audio gear, in anything really. The world would be dull with one product for all.

Then there are those who actually use double blind testing to see if what is claimed to be heard can actually be heard. Unless you have done this, it is all subjective and should be labeled as such. This is also the reason why fantastical claims like sonic differences between digital cables is met with such scorn.

Then there are those who actually use double blind testing to see if what is claimed to be heard can actually be heard. Unless you have done this, it is all subjective and should be labeled as such. This is also the reason why fantastical claims like sonic differences between digital cables is met with such scorn.

DBT testing....lol, who hasn't ? Yet are you trained to even listen ? Do you have a revealing system to even worry about any of this ?

I've been an audio guy for going on 40 years, been around the block and then some with low-fi to hi-fi and diminishing returns. They say that seeing is believing, in audio it's hearing is believing. Unless your willing to experiment some with your own gear in your own home with your ears, then opinions on anything audio related carry little weight. No offense there.

Audio isn't a one size fits all, plenty of room to expand your horizons if you so wish.

Look, not trying to get into a pissing match about cables, dacs or whatever audio related. All I'm saying is to experiment with some decent stuff and not the cheap consumer grade stuff from BestBuy or Amazon.

If your happy with what you have, cool, rock on and enjoy the tunes. If you want to hear better, educate yourself a bit and get your feet wet experimenting yourself. It's not rocket science, nor does it need to be, but nothing was ever discovered sitting on the couch wondering.

DBT testing....lol, who hasn't ? Yet are you trained to even listen ? Do you have a revealing system to even worry about any of this ?

I've been an audio guy for going on 40 years, been around the block and then some with low-fi to hi-fi and diminishing returns. They say that seeing is believing, in audio it's hearing is believing. Unless your willing to experiment some with your own gear in your own home with your ears, then opinions on anything audio related carry little weight. No offense there.

Audio isn't a one size fits all, plenty of room to expand your horizons if you so wish.

Ahhh "trained ears" and "revealing system", the old "Your hearing must suck or your system must suck!" thinly veiled insult from the audiophools. You guys have to get some new material, for you have no idea about my training, hearing ability, or my system. Yet you fling the insult out anyway, for it is your only defense.

Furthermore, I don't need better training or a better system because others have done the testing for me. Just like I don't have to personally listen for the background radiation for the Big Bang, because Penzias and Wilson already did it for me.

Ahhh "trained ears" and "revealing system", the old "Your hearing must suck or your system must suck!" thinly veiled insult from the audiophools. You guys have to get some new material, for you have no idea about my training, hearing ability, or my system. Yet you fling the insult out anyway, for it is your only defense.

Furthermore, I don't need better training or a better system because others have done the testing for me. Just like I don't have to personally listen for the background radiation for the Big Bang, because Penzias and Wilson already did it for me.

That's about the equivalent of listening with someone elses ears. Are you saying science has never gotten anything wrong ? History may beg to differ.
Not trying to insult you, trying to get you to step outside the box that some put themselves in for various reasons.

constructionguy,

Audio Salesman 101 shows budding sales staff how to control the listening session and point the "obvious" comparison outcome in the desired direction. It's very simple, really. It's a great show and the customer goes home happy. It's usually not the case that the salesperson is attempting to stick the customer with a lemon, the sales person may truly believe that he or she is doing the customer a favor, but the outcome has been influenced by the salesperson. Audiophiles think that they operate on a plane above all of this, but in the end they are human too. Magicians are masters of misdirection. There is nothing sinister, it's just a good show, and wonderful fodder for psychologists to work with. Dig into this a little and you'll discover some wonderful demonstrations where seeing is believing, but not really what happened.

We are not claiming that there cannot be any audible differences, only that many of these "obvious" differences disappear during controlled listening tests.

Controlled tests are hard to set up and boring for the participants. It's much easier to stick one's head in a room for a few seconds, declare "obviously better," and move on. Even for home demonstrations with familiar surroundings, things can go wrong. Changes in the environment must be tracked as well as the condition of the listening panel. If one has been recently exposed to noise sources, such as riding in a car, bus, train, or plane, it takes a while for our hearing to recover.

Level differences that are difficult to measure will have a major impact on the results. Home listeners are not usually equipped to make these measurements and correct the mismatch. Unless someone has overtly convinced me that they have correctly matched the levels, I throw their observations into the "war story" bin and mostly ignore it. I realize that this is irksome and crushing to the audiophile, but I am jaded by too many "my dog is better than your dog" show-downs. Nothing is proven and everyone goes home mad.

That's about the equivalent of listening with someone elses ears. Are you saying science has never gotten anything wrong ? History may beg to differ.
Not trying to insult you, trying to get you to step outside the box that some put themselves in for various reasons.

Cliché #3 - "Science gets stuff wrong!!"

Yes, science gets stuff wrong. How do they prove it wrong? By carefully constructed experiments based on a new hypothesis that prove what was thought before to be incorrect. Carefully constructed experiments like a double blind study, none of which have ever proven the nonsense that digital cables, if operating correctly, make any difference in sound. If you conduct such an experiment and you actually prove there is a difference, then science will be proven wrong. Until then, you are simply reporting your bias . Good luck with that experiment..

As I have said before: "Trust your ears (in a double blind test)!!"