Jump to content
IGNORED

Router and Ethernet Switch suggestions


Recommended Posts

On 12/2/2017 at 12:17 PM, BigAlMc said:

Thanks for the contribution @EdmontonCanuck

 

All I can say is that there are many aspects of this hobby that don't make sense. I'll trust my ears over perceived wisdom as that approach has led to many improvements that don't all make sense at first glance. 

 

My friends laughed there asses off when I told them I was investing in clean electricity for my hifi. And completely pissed themselves when I told them how much. But how many of this forum would ignore power supplies now. 

 

Same thing for clocks at every stage of the chain. We're only just finding out how this stuff really works. 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

 

I heard they can still get a command signaled to Voyager I

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

I heard they can still get a command signaled to Voyager I

True.

But how does does the command string sound to Voyager?

Forget about potential packet loss the gamma, beta, zeta and x rays must be awfully fatiguing plus the wireless noise!!

Don't even get me started on neutrinos.

Too bad Audioquest doesn't make an Interstellar space cookie cable to clean all of that up.

Unfortunately that cable would cost more than the Apollo Space program even in bulk

Link to comment
On 11/28/2017 at 8:39 AM, davide256 said:

Correct. All audio devices connected to a network have to have a buffer sufficient to avoid playback gaps  due to momentary traffic  congestion or traffic reroutes.

Yes,

Very true, but irrelevant to the subject at hand: which is the quality of what is loaded into the buffer.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Yes,

Very true, but irrelevant to the subject at hand: which is the quality of what is loaded into the buffer.

All data sent across a network has a packet/frame checksum, this allows  the distant end to

verify what was sent was not altered before its loaded into buffer. And if loading into a buffer was subject to data error, the machine you are working on would not work,

there would be no PC's, Mac's or mainframes. Trillions of dollars in transactions ride across networks every day, banks  are not happy with machines that corrupt data in any way..

 

If you want to look for problems with network audio devices look (a) to how well electrically behaved its Ethernet attached neighbor is ( b) how well behaved the device processing audio is (b) at what happens when a & b are interconnected and the data is extracted from the buffer, turned into an analog signal output that has little to no error correction.

 

Ethernet ports are basically "least cost" devices intended for switches, routers and PC's... I trust them not for being built to the spec needed to prevent 2 devices from electrically interacting thru leakage voltages at a level that would cause an audio device to degrade for sound.  Fiber optics are the cheapest way to tackle the transmission source electrically interfering with the receiving system.

Regards,

Dave

 

Audio system

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Yes,

Very true, but irrelevant to the subject at hand: which is the quality of what is loaded into the buffer.

 

What can you possibly mean by this statement? 

 

Create two 256MB RAM disks, drive f:\ and drive g:\. 

 

Transfer a DSD or 24/192 PCM track with one cable to RAM disk f:\ and use another cable to RAM disk g:\

 

1. Dollars to donuts the MD5 hash will be the same

2. You will fail miserably when we use Foobar ABX to compare the identical track on f:\ and g:\

 

 

Link to comment
On 12/3/2017 at 7:49 PM, Milt99 said:

True.

But how does does the command string sound to Voyager?

Forget about potential packet loss the gamma, beta, zeta and x rays must be awfully fatiguing plus the wireless noise!!

 

Trust me, the fact that Voyager did 100% what was transmitted to it and it could report back will be lost on most subjectivists here.

Link to comment
On 12/2/2017 at 8:39 AM, EdmontonCanuck said:

Just thought I'd take a peak at this thread, and really, is it for real?

 

 

People are working to make rather minor improvements in SQ, but it's like sports cars "not something for everybody, but everything for somebody."

 

Some ideas or claims violate known laws of electronics are surely due to confirmation bias.

 

Others only seem to (or violate simplified 'laws' which are based on simplifying assumptions that may be incorrect).

Link to comment
  • 5 months later...
On 11/19/2017 at 5:10 PM, lmitche said:

you can configure the network adapter to 100 mbps which is 1/10 the normal gigabit adapter speed.  This increases sound quality immensely.

couldn't one just use a previous gen 10/100 switch, or are there certain switches that deal with noise better than others.  I've seen Netgear GS108 and D-link DSG-105 mentioned a few times.  Is there something that these two popular "entry level" models provide that say the older gen Dlink DES-105 wouldn't? 

 

I'm finally getting off my duff to do the whole renderer thing - cutting the umbilical from Mac to DAC!

Link to comment
5 hours ago, buonassi said:

couldn't one just use a previous gen 10/100 switch, or are there certain switches that deal with noise better than other

Yes, it would appear that some switches have more isolation than others. Measuring every switch would be impossible, but we know a few models, like the netgear Fs105 v3 and gs108 v3, that have been measured and do the job well.

 

There are numerous posts around CA on this topic including the research done by John Swenson on various switch configurations and models.

 

As to the sq of 100 vs.1000 mbps my tests are pretty definitive, 100mbps sounds best here. Nevertheless YMMV.

Pareto Audio aka nuckleheadaudio

Link to comment

Get a used Cisco 2960-8TC-L and never look back. Trounced my Netgear switch with ground shunting. Superior clocking, PHY layer etc, and with a built in SMPS one doesn’t have to worry about extrenal power options. 

SERVER CLOSET (in office directly below living room stereo):NUC 7i5BNH with Roon ROCK (ZeroZone 12V on the NUC)>Cisco 2690L-16PS switch>Sonore opticalModule (Uptone LPS 1.2)>

LIVING ROOM: Sonore opticalRendu Roon version (Sonore Power Supply)> Shunyata Venom USB>Naim DAC V1>Witchhat DIN>Naim NAP 160 Bolt Down>Chord Rumor 2>Audio Physic Compact Classics. OFFICE: opticalModule> Sonore microRendu 1.4> Matrix Mini-i Pro 3> Naim NAP 110>NACA5>KEF Ls50's. BJC 6a and Ghent Catsnake 6a JSSG ethernet; AC cables: Shunyata Venom NR V-10; Audience Forte F3; Ice Age copper/copper; Sean Jacobs CHC PowerBlack, Moon Audio DIN>RCA, USB A>C. Isolation: Herbie's Audio Lab. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, lmitche said:

Yes, it would appear that some switches have more isolation than others. Measuring every switch would be impossible, but we know a few models, like the netgear Fs105 v3 and gs108 v3, that have been measured and do the job well.

 

There are numerous posts around CA on this topic including the research done by John Swenson on various switch configurations and models.

 

As to the sq of 100 vs.1000 mbps my tests are pretty definitive, 100mbps sounds best here. Nevertheless YMMV.

This was recommended to me.  Not sure but another thing to consider.  I have just gone the renderer route with my MSB and that part was recommended.

 

http://www.emosystems.com/product/en-70hd-ultra-compact-network-isolator/

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Summit said:

@ Priaptor @ lmitche did the network isolation transformer make a meaningful SQ difference in your audio systems?

Yes, in the day. I've had them in for so long, that I can't remember the sound without.

 

Nevertheless continued tweaking on the network continues to yield SQ gains. I am still not done with network optimization.  I am optimistic that John Swenson's research finds the root cause of network degradation of SQ.

Pareto Audio aka nuckleheadaudio

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Priaptor said:

This was recommended to me.  Not sure but another thing to consider.  I have just gone the renderer route with my MSB and that part was recommended.

 

http://www.emosystems.com/product/en-70hd-ultra-compact-network-isolator/

 

The Baaske MI1005 is an equivalent and available often on flea bay.  It seems EMO bought Baaske and now sells the EN 1005.   One of the guys here (I think it was jwtrace) said he sprung for a higher level EMO unit and it was worth it over the EN70.  It doesn’t look like they offer it anymore. 

 

http://www.emosystems.com/network-isolators/

Link to comment
11 hours ago, charlesphoto said:

Get a used Cisco 2960-8TC-L and never look back. Trounced my Netgear switch with ground shunting.

 

Is this another common/proven option?  That's commercial grade! 

 

3 hours ago, lmitche said:

I am optimistic that John Swenson's research finds the root cause of network degradation of SQ.

 

Let's hope so.  This way, once and for all, we can tell the "bits are bits" objectivists to shove off.

 

I have a USB regenerator / clean power infuser between my Mac and Dac currently.  I can tell a difference with it in, certainly.  It's not night and day, but I'm positive I could pass a blind test if someone switched it out / and back.  

 

The general consensus seems to be that going with a LAN and using a bridge/renderer is THE best it gets for pre-DAC treatment for digital audio.  Should I expect a step up in SQ over the regenerator I have in place now?  If one were to try and quantify it (knowing that everyone's situation is different) what are we talking?  That last 1-2%, or are we talking 'pseudo-analoge'?  I know its sinful to use that word because it's all analogue, but it's the best I can think of.  For example, when I upsample to DSD, I get that pseudo analogue sound that's pretty noticeable.  

Link to comment

The Cisco 2960 has been a known entity for some time over on the Naim forum. Here’s a recent thread: http://forums.naimaudio.com/topic/cisco-switch

 

I have to say after buying a $29 ebay one I’m a believer now. So much so I bought a second one top go to via the SFP fiber out to one right before the microRendu, dumping the FMC’s I had before. Much better than the Netgears with ground trick and/or linear power supply. I think page 6 of that thread there’s a complete breakdown of models etc. POE models would be another way to go. It’s all about the superior clocking, layers and power. These were $500-1000 switches new that can be had for $25-150 depending on model and newness. And plenty of supply out there. These commercial grade switches will be the ones that Uptone have to beat, not the big box consumer switches. 

SERVER CLOSET (in office directly below living room stereo):NUC 7i5BNH with Roon ROCK (ZeroZone 12V on the NUC)>Cisco 2690L-16PS switch>Sonore opticalModule (Uptone LPS 1.2)>

LIVING ROOM: Sonore opticalRendu Roon version (Sonore Power Supply)> Shunyata Venom USB>Naim DAC V1>Witchhat DIN>Naim NAP 160 Bolt Down>Chord Rumor 2>Audio Physic Compact Classics. OFFICE: opticalModule> Sonore microRendu 1.4> Matrix Mini-i Pro 3> Naim NAP 110>NACA5>KEF Ls50's. BJC 6a and Ghent Catsnake 6a JSSG ethernet; AC cables: Shunyata Venom NR V-10; Audience Forte F3; Ice Age copper/copper; Sean Jacobs CHC PowerBlack, Moon Audio DIN>RCA, USB A>C. Isolation: Herbie's Audio Lab. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, buonassi said:

 

The general consensus seems to be that going with a LAN and using a bridge/renderer is THE best it gets for pre-DAC treatment for digital audio.  

 

There is no general consensus, but rather two camps,  the two box network streaming camp, and a one box direct to DAC camp.

 

It seems that many of us started in the network streaming box camp and moved to the one direct to to DAC camp.

 

Pareto Audio aka nuckleheadaudio

Link to comment
15 hours ago, buonassi said:

The general consensus seems to be that going with a LAN and using a bridge/renderer is THE best it gets for pre-DAC treatment for digital audio.  Should I expect a step up in SQ over the regenerator I have in place now?  If one were to try and quantify it (knowing that everyone's situation is different) what are we talking?

 

Well unless your DAC or DDC has an Ethernet input (or unless you choose to use a renderer with S/PDIF output), USB regeneration still has its place—in the critical spot right before your DAC.  B|

Link to comment
3 hours ago, lmitche said:

 

There is no general consensus, but rather two camps,  the two box network streaming camp, and a one box direct to DAC camp.

 

It seems that many of us started in the network streaming box camp and moved to the one direct to to DAC camp.

 

 

Ya but!!  What did you have to do to get the direct up to a renderer level of SQ?  I think I’ve read about the numerous individual LT3045 regulated LPS just for the computer. And then there are the clock upgrades and clock cable effects. 

 

You’ve got as much spaghetti as I do!  ?

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Well unless your DAC or DDC has an Ethernet input (or unless you choose to use a renderer with S/PDIF output), USB regeneration still has its place—in the critical spot right before your DAC.  B|

 

Well, maybe a poorly designed DAC. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, lmitche said:

Yesterday I replaced the motherboard on my music server.

So what motherboard and CPU are you using now?

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...