Google Announces High-Res Support for Chromecast Audio

Thanks to reader Stephen D. for the heads up on this oh-so-interesting news:
Introducing Hi-Res audio support
Close your eyes and imagine the musician is playing in the room. Today we’re rolling out high-resolution audio support, which gives you even higher quality music playback using Chromecast Audio. With support of up to 96KHz/24bit lossless audio playback, you can enjoy higher-than-CD-quality audio on your existing high fidelity audio equipment.
Google's Chromecast Audio device costs $35, that's thirty five dollars, three tens and five and high-res support comes to all Chromecast Audio devices via software update. You can't see it but you it's there.

Here's some info on the device.

mtymous1's picture

Raspberry Pi supports 24/192 over HDMI. And if you wanted, you could also attach a DAC (likely your existing external USB DAC, or a separate card) to the Pi, as well.

The Pi itself is three tens - you can use the five to get an 8GB card in order to boot your choice of many free operating environments. (Volumio, Kodi, RaspyFi, and OpenELEC immediately come to mind.)

Michael Lavorgna's picture
...these two products target two different markets.
mtymous1's picture

The post lauded a $35 device that supports up to a mere 96 kHz. In the same vein of frequency, my comment was intended to remind folks of the RPi that can achieve 192 kHz, plus USB DAC support for about the same cost.

(However, I 100% agree with the the non sequitur about each product targeting two different markets!)

Michael Lavorgna's picture
Yes, you've made a point. Congratulations.
BradleyP's picture

And 96/24 is MEANINGLESS on the DAC inside the Chromecast Audio. It's part of a $35 component. The real question is whether porting the digits out of the Chromecast into a real DAC produces Hi Res sound, or is even that compromised in such a way that 96/24 does not matter? I own one of these and use the built-in DAC for casual listening and have read a dozen reviews of it, but NOBODY in the audiophile press has evaluated the quality of the toslink connection versus other digital bridges in a high end environment. Please, someone, anyone, perform a thorough evaluation and let us know what you discover.

branon's picture

My less than thorough evaluation- I fed it into the aux in of the new Audioengine HD6 and then switched to the optical input. The difference was fairly obvious. It changed my views of the HD6.

Michael Lavorgna's picture
Flips my IGNORE switch. We're talking about a $35 audio component not a cure for foot fungus.'s picture

This is actually a pretty interesting development and well worth posting. Many thanks.

paulg's picture

I'm all set to go, but need a app.

monetschemist's picture
MilesFerg's picture

I'm waiting for Tidal to be able to direct cast to the device as well, but until then, you can use BubbleUPnP to stream Tidal. I don't know if there is any compromise to the rate/quality of the stream. My system is not optimally set up since losing my dedicated room, but Feeding the optical out to a DAC for both Spotify and Tidal sounds very good. I'm enjoying the music immensely, which is the point.

monetschemist's picture

There is an article at this link that talks about setting up a Linux machine to serve its content via Samba and using and Android phone to cast that content.

I bet Windows users could do the same by sharing their music directory.

branon's picture

With Synology and Plex both having baked Chromecast into their apps, this is a hell of a little thing.
And if one is worried about the DAC, one can always connect it to an optical input in a regular dac or a dac-integrated. In fact its almost like a preamp - I can switch between google play and the personal collection on my NAS without having to worry about carrying a remote control. I even get to change the volume.
In fact I purchased a second one to feed into my peachtree deepblue 2's optical input.
It solves a lot of problems.