Hello this is my first post. I own a Bartok (without headphone amp) and combine this with a Rossini clock. I use a Innuos Zenith MKIII server directly connected to my highspeed fibre optic connected hub/router via network isolator (EMOSAFE EN-1005+)* which aside from protecting from voltage surges also serves as galvanic isolation from the upstream connections. The ethernet cable run from the Innuos server to the Bartok is 1m of CAT 6 (unshielded). The whole system (except for the hub/router which is on the main house mains ring) is served from a dedicated 16A supply with noise filtering.
*The ethernet isolator does not have an audible impact when added or removed from the server input.
I have enjoyed many of the entries in the community over the last few months since getting into DCS. Notable contributors from whom I have gained real insight include Pale Rider, Ermos, PAR and all2ofme - many thanks for your time.
To concur with many others on this forum, I find that:
-I much prefer using the Bartok with a pre-amp - especially for low level listening.
-6V out is more dynamic (faster transients) and musical than 2v - if your system is compatible?
-Ethernet input is more coherent and in my view more authentic to reality than USB - however USB when sent via a Innuos Pheonix re-clocker can render more micro detail, air, decay and apparent speed but overall is less focussed.
-The addition of the Rossini clock brings about a dramatic uplift to the sound (literally) with overall focus and instrument separation /depth improved while the sound stage in my case literally lifted upwards on my speaker with more treble detail becoming apparent and the bass less diffuse.
-Clock cables by ‘Design cable’ (£15 a go) with 75Ohm Neutrik connectors are a decent improvement on the ones supplied with the clock.
-The Bartok works fine with a Puccini clock - set for either 44.1 or 48 with Bartok automatically taking care of the other sample rate for each file played - a decent improvement on the Bartok alone.
-The Rossini clock performance is audibly better than the Puccini clock.
-The Innous Zenith MKIII server now works properly with Mosaic since the recent software update.
So in the context of the above I wanted to see if other members also experience the following:
The sound quality of the same albums played (streamed) from Qobuz sound inferior to those stored locally. By 'inferior 'I mean that Qobuz files, while good to listen too are less detailed, less fluid / free flowing with marginally muted attack and decays compared to the locally streamed version. (Note: I have Qobuz set to maximum resolution as the default). I have tried this comparison with a number of albums with varying bit depth and sample rates and always find this to be the case? In all instances to date, the file I have purchased from Qobuz (.WAV or AIFF format), sounds better when played direct from my server than when streamed from Qobuz. In both scenarios I am using Mosaic control the stream.
Do you people think think the loss of ‘quality’ is a function of the extra processing that the Bartok /Mosaic platforms needs to complete when decoding a Qobuz stream or is that Qobuz’ file transmission /compression regime is having a negative effect? Either way I do not obtain the same pleasure listening to internet streamed files as I do from locally stored versions. My ‘perception’ that there is a difference would appear to be at odds with the idea these files when rendered by a more than capable computing platform should sound the same?