Arcam Introduces ST60 Network Audio Player

Britain’s Arcam has announced the ST60, the company’s first network audio player.

The ST60 provides built-in support for Deezer, Napster, Qobuz, Spotify and TIDAL, and can accept audio streamed over a wired or wireless network from both UPnP sources and portable devices via AirPlay2 or Google Cast. It also provides full decoding of MQA and is Roon Ready.

Outfitted with an ESS9038 32-bit/192kHz stereo DAC, the ST60 handles playback of AIFF, ALAC, FLAC and WAV formats. It also has IP and RS232 control for integration with whole-house control systems, including those from Crestron and Control4. Connection options include Ethernet, USB, and Wi-Fi, along with balanced XLR and stereo RCA analog and coaxial and optical digital outputs. The ST60 comes with a hardware remote control, and can be operated using the Arcam MusicLife app.

The Arcam ST60 will be available in late 2020 for $1,499. Check out Arcam’s website for more info.

COMMENTS
Yahooboy's picture

delivering the sound of the original master recording in the highest possible sound quality.
Delivering the highest possible quality, with a "format" that throws away musical information. Then have the b.lls to claim they are better than any lossless format.

False marketing

boulderskies's picture

there will always be the MQA Haters. those are the ones that know little if anything about the technology and probably dont have any equipment capable of fully unfolding the files. i am guilty of the second item but cant hate something i've never tried.

Yahooboy's picture

I would like to learn how a lossy format that markets itself as a Hires (and lossy?, there's a contradiction)
Hope You can help Me.

There must be something about the false marketing since Arcam has edited their website to no longer say: delivering the sound of the original master recording in the highest possible sound quality.
In stead it now says: MQA supported

Wonder why?

boulderskies's picture

would using the term "Naysayers" be more palatable?
a file's compression ("lossiness) is different from "hi-res." "hi-res" has to do with bit depth and sample rate.
MQA, a studio to distribution technique tthat compresses a file retaining most of the file's information. you are free to Google it to learn more. until you do, i think it unfair to criticize it.

Yahooboy's picture

I had hoped that You would be able to inform Me.
Hater or Naysayer implies prejudice. So no, not palatable.

So let Me understand a 320 kbs MP3 upsampled to 24 bits 384 kHz is a Hires file? MQA has been asked to show that their proprietary "format" actually is "perceptually" without loss (as their marketing puts it)

Took Your advice went on Duckduckgo.com searched and found and article on MQA by Archimago. Spoiler, he doesn't agree with You
I even found this: audiophilestyle.com/blogs/entry/466-some-analysis-and-comparison-of-mqa-encoded-flac-vs-normal-optimized-hires-flac/

boulderskies's picture

be proud. you learned something all by yourself. i dont do others' research.
and no, and no, nothing can restore a file (mp3) to something it isnt. neither MQA nor hi-res implies that.
why dont you research what MQA and hi-rez are rather than other peoples' opinion of them? you might learn even more.
keep up the good work.

Yahooboy's picture

Defending MQA (sure You're not getting Your paychecks from a Bob Stuart affiliated company) Your replies sound rather familiar, leaning towards MQA's marketing garble.

By the way have heard plenty of MQA on both midfi systems and HighEnd systems. Initially I was looking for a new DAC ended up not wanting to give My money to any manufacturer trying to sell Me the MQA Cool Aid.

boulderskies's picture

would using the term "Naysayers" be more palatable?
a file's compression ("lossiness) is different from "hi-res." "hi-res" has to do with bit depth and sample rate.
MQA, a studio to distribution technique tthat compresses a file retaining most of the file's information. you are free to Google it to learn more. until you do, i think it unfair to criticize it.

MatthewWeflen's picture

I don't understand charging this much for a digital player that can't output DSD.

hk2000's picture

Is this some king of conspiracy? It used to be every streaming device coming out supported Pandora and Slacker/LiveXLive in addition to some internet radio... now it seems most manufactures are only offering the "high end" and/or costly services like Tidal, Qobuz... etc. So basically if you're not willing to shell out monthly payments, the device will be mostly useless! I know Spotify offers free service, but how hard can it be to include those other services- especially that they've been around for quite sometime, and there is no danger of them going anywhere, unlike the niche services every one seems to include in there devices!!!

X