Anyone have any info on The Bricasti Design Model 5 Network Player

[Miska]

10 hours ago, Em2016 said:

Macbook user here :-) And Roon Core (ROCK) and Roon endpoints are all ethernet based.

 

You can certainly build Roon Server and Roon Bridge with optical connections. No problems on that front, no need for FMC.

 

Btw, "ethernet" also includes optical media links as well as copper.

 

10 hours ago, Em2016 said:

But yes, that's a solution if you just have one computer as both your 'core' or server, and 'endpoint'.

 

Nope, works for both Roon and HQPlayer separate server + endpoint. And of course also for Roon <-> HQPlayer comms. So you have options such as copper or optical ethernet, and WiFi.

[cjf]

12 hours ago, Miska said:

I think manufacturers should just equip devices with SFP slots, then you can choose between copper ethernet and various different optical links. This is what is the common practice in normal IT world.

+1

 

I've long wondered why this approach still gets ignored by the manufacturers of these audiophile geared streaming/server devices.

 

I suspect the use of Fiber is still considered Snake Oil and very foreign to the creators at this stage of the game even though the rest of the computer/security world have been using it for its isolation and long distance benefits for a long time.

 

If one wanted to build their own server/streamer and didn't care about trying to keep the footprint small and low power then building an all Fiber rig is pretty easy to to.

[One and a half]

A picture speaks a thousand words on why I didn't choose Ethernet for audio transmission.

 

Prior to the M5 being delivered, I did ask the vendor if a home run connection could be made from a computer to the M5. The answer was no, the M5 needed to be connected to a router, NAS, and a direct computer connection was too noisy.  This is paraphrased.

With all the components making up the network with a direct connection to the M5 plus contributed SMPS noise of each device (and those not shown), the vendor puts forward that this system is less noisy than a direct connection to a PC? I could not follow this logic, and returned the M5.

High leakage currents are everywhere, but certainly the bits get through unharmed. hahahaha. 

 

The USB system is rather straightforward and in a controlled space. There is no problem with cabling distance, there's a dedicated line x 2 of Ethernet from the Roon server to a renderer or use any line for AES3 transmissions.

 

As for replacing copper with Fibre. No. Costs too much to run and install and for what advantage? High speed is not a priority,  galvanic isolation, with power supplies that leak? Any noise on the network will end up where you don't want it, so keep the noise OUT of the audio system, why introduce rubbish. I don't follow. @Miska, you have to try harder.

Visio-Ethernet and USB Audio.pdf

[Miska]

4 hours ago, One and a half said:

As for replacing copper with Fibre. No. Costs too much to run and install and for what advantage? High speed is not a priority,  galvanic isolation, with power supplies that leak? Any noise on the network will end up where you don't want it, so keep the noise OUT of the audio system, why introduce rubbish. I don't follow. @Miska, you have to try harder.

Visio-Ethernet and USB Audio.pdf

 

I just don't understand why would you want limiting, annoying point-to-point connections? That is not how networks are designed to be built. And don't use those expensive STP audiophile ethernet cables, they are a big problem! Probably lot of people end up using all kinds of extra stuff just because they use wrong type of network cable!

 

Only use network cables that have connectors like this:

 

Do not use network cables that have connectors like this, unless you really really know what you are doing (because you spoil the galvanic isolation you'd otherwise have):

 

 

I like the first picture the best. Flexible, convenient and great quality without ground loop problems or such. In your USB setup you have contiguous chain of ground connections between devices -> asking for trouble and noise.

 

I have 5 gigabit switches around the house, three WiFi access points, and I've lost count how many computers and DACs. And I don't have noise problems, I've measured it. And I don't have more than one ethernet connection on any other computer than my internet server/firewall machines.

 

Whenever I manage to see a noise problem, it always has to do with USB. Not network. And getting rid of it may be complex.

 

And then there's the freaking UAC2, and number of devices leak the fixed packet rate used there to the analog output. That appears as spectrum peaks at multiples of 8 kHz.

 

[One and a half]

33 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I just don't understand why would you want limiting, annoying point-to-point connections? That is not how networks are designed to be built. And don't use those expensive STP audiophile ethernet cables, they are a big problem! Probably lot of people end up using all kinds of extra stuff just because they use wrong type of network cable!

Agree with STP cable to a degree. STP kills radiated noise, but allows conductive noise to travel freely between source and target. So whats the better of the two evils?

 

Quote

 

I like the first picture the best. Flexible, convenient and great quality without ground loop problems or such. In your USB setup you have contiguous chain of ground connections between devices -> asking for trouble and noise.

You've ignored the power supplies that feed the network and their effects on conducted noise via AC. There are less hops to the audio system with USB. All the 0V from the power supplies are joined at the USB side and are grounded. In any case many network renderers have USB outputs, so were are back to square one using that transmission. 

Quote

 

I have 5 gigabit switches around the house, three WiFi access points, and I've lost count how many computers and DACs. And I don't have noise problems, I've measured it. And I don't have more than one ethernet connection on any other computer than my internet server/firewall machines.

A self confessed network fan, and it's your profession, you should know how this works. You are entitled to enjoy the RF. Not all of us are networking gurus, nor want to be, but out of necessity have to put up and learn networking basics, troubleshoot DNS, IP address, subnet management, DHCP, jumbo packets, auto negotiation, ping, routing......zgsplatzg! enough already. bordering on insanity. A simple cable connection, source to target and done thank you, is that too much to ask for?

Quote

 

Whenever I manage to see a noise problem, it always has to do with USB. Not network. And getting rid of it may be complex.

 

And then there's the freaking UAC2, and number of devices leak the fixed packet rate used there to the analog output. That appears as spectrum peaks at multiples of 8 kHz.

 

I prefer controlling noise with USB than be at the mercy of an Ethernet renderer that by nature needs to have a computer to decode the signals. So trade off the controlled noise versus a sonic character that's uncontrollable. Oh, where's the instant on? 

[One and a half]

35 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I just don't understand why would you want limiting, annoying point-to-point connections? That is not how networks are designed to be built. And don't use those expensive STP audiophile ethernet cables, they are a big problem! Probably lot of people end up using all kinds of extra stuff just because they use wrong type of network cable!

 

Maybe cause you don't understand other people's reasons? 

 

Look, I don't need a complex network to manage, you find point to point connections annoying, I enjoy them, cause they are simple and lo, they work. Source to target like turntable-amp, tuner-amp, you know fundamental stuff, not router-switch-switch-computer-renderer...all those wires to end up at the same point. 

[Miska]

If you want point-to-point connections. Certainly networking gear is not for you. Probably you don't want to connect to internet either. It is not point-to-point either, it is a network. You don't run USB from home to your ISP's backbone either.

 

What comes to "audiophile switches" and the like, try to convince Tidal and your ISP to have such in their network. If you don't like optical, try to get ISPs adopt copper again, good luck with that.

 

Having ordinary network gear and connections in your home is much simpler and less noisy than anything out there in big world. Including your mobile phone's cellular connection. If streaming from Tidal servers to your stereos work without audiophile switches at the ISP side, it'll work just fine the last few meters in your home too.

 

1 hour ago, One and a half said:

Source to target like turntable-amp, tuner-amp

 

That creates potential ground current setup. This can easily create noise problems.

 

1 hour ago, One and a half said:

not router-switch-switch-computer-renderer

 

While this doesn't as long as you don't purposefully screw it up. This is unlikely to create noise problems.

 

[Miska]

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

Agree with STP cable to a degree. STP kills radiated noise, but allows conductive noise to travel freely between source and target. So whats the better of the two evils?

 

Since network signaling on twisted pair is differential, it doesn't really radiate anything. I use mostly UTP. And STP only on few certain very carefully selected short feeds.

 

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

You've ignored the power supplies that feed the network and their effects on conducted noise via AC.

 

I have power filters for audio gear. SMPS audio gear on one filter, LPS audio gear or another one. No problems what so ever.

 

Your home likely has quite a bunch of SMPS equipment anyway.

 

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

There are less hops to the audio system with USB.

 

That creates the noise problem. Direct point-to-point noise conduction. With ethernet you have transformer isolation at every connector. More you have hops, more you have isolation between the source and endpoint.

 

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

A simple cable connection, source to target and done thank you, is that too much to ask for?

 

If it's for a reason. I don't see simple UTP cable connection from a switch or wall socket to some piece of equipment a problem. And then I can access than equipment from any of the computers around the house.

 

2 hours ago, One and a half said:

Not all of us are networking gurus, nor want to be, but out of necessity have to put up and learn networking basics, troubleshoot DNS, IP address, subnet management, DHCP, jumbo packets, auto negotiation, ping, routing......zgsplatzg!

 

You are making it very hard for yourself by having multi-homed nodes (more than one network interface). Having 1 router and one 16-port switch (in a metal case, with good built-in PSU, no wall-warts) usually makes things work pretty much plug-and-play. Home routers manage DHCP/DNS and such.

 

 

P.S. In cases where NAA-like devices help, I've measured about 10 dB drop in noise peaks compared to direct USB connection. Pulling the network plug have not made difference in these cases.

[plissken]

On 2/14/2018 at 4:06 AM, One and a half said:

Agree with STP cable to a degree. STP kills radiated noise, but allows conductive noise to travel freely between source and target. So whats the better of the two evils?

 

Usually a floated shield. BTW CAT6 standard calls for FTP and a center spline to enforce pair separation. The additional shield around the FTP assembly isn't required. 

 

And what do you mean by conductive? CAT cabling is CMNR by design and has noise cancellation circuitry at both ends. 

[One and a half]

28 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Usually a floated shield. BTW CAT6 standard calls for FTP and a center spline to enforce pair separation. The additional shield around the FTP assembly isn't required. 

 

And what do you mean by conductive? CAT cabling is CMNR by design and has noise cancellation circuitry at both ends. 

Imagine 2 switches and an off the shelf shielded Ethernet cable between the two carrying traffic. The switches are metal clad driven by wall warts. If CAT cabling is CMNR by design, what shield current would be between the two switches?

[One and a half]

On 2/14/2018 at 9:03 PM, Miska said:

If it's for a reason. I don't see simple UTP cable connection from a switch or wall socket to some piece of equipment a problem. And then I can access than equipment from any of the computers around the house.

 

You may have missed the really simple connection on the first page of the PDF, under the line. This maybe a limitation of the Bricasti M5, but under advice from the vendor,  I could not wire an Ethernet cable from the source PC to the M5 directly because there is no router or NAS. If the Bricasti was connected to the rest of the network like any computer, the M5 would have worked. How well is a matter of discussion. Besides I don't need to access from anywhere else, since Roon takes care of all that.

[One and a half]

To illustrate the point above there's voltages on chassis of Ethernet gear that if left uncontrolled end up where you don't want them at the DAC. 

For fun, I grabbed a GS108 (S2), two UTP cables, a PC and its power supply, being a typical small network into the main 16 way switch. The PC was on and running and there was traffic on the switches, nothing heavy, just I'm alive.

 

Measured voltages 

V1 [S1 to S2] Metal on the RJ45 - 18.1 Vac

 

V2 [S2 to PC Frame] - 13.9 Vac

 

V3 [PC Frame to S1 RJ45 Metal] - 8.2 Vac

 

0V on the GS108 and the PC 0V - 15.2 Vac

 

All the above were at ~75Hz, and measured on the LoZ setting of a Fluke 289.

 

V5 [PC Frame to DDC Frame via USB Cable] 1.0 Vac @ 50Hz. (Must get around to tying this to ground).

 

I couldn't find a STP cable on hand to try, but could repeat the experiment again in a couple of days.

 

No wonder @Miska advises against STP, since the chassis of the different parts of the network are at differences of voltages and significant ones at that, enough to create the worst ground loop for low and high impedance leakage currents to travel wherever they like. As far as the bits go they couldn't care less, but these voltages end up in the processing of streamers and DACs and care I do about these. To create the same potential for these devices would be a nightmare, the best alternative is provide a switch in front of the Ethernet renderer or streamer to kill and leakage currents. A standard filter won't work, because the power supply needs to be isolated as well. I believe Uptone is working on something that would work in this situation .

 

Apart from a few diversions here and there, 'network noise' needs taming as much as USB otherwise threads like this wouldn't exist... would they? 

 

After measuring these voltages, I didn't bother getting the radio out again to do a proximity test, forget shield currents in the microamps, there's milliamps of loop current here.

 

Ethernet Voltages.pdf

[Miska]

4 hours ago, One and a half said:

No wonder @Miska advises against STP, since the chassis of the different parts of the network are at differences of voltages and significant ones at that, enough to create the worst ground loop for low and high impedance leakage currents to travel wherever they like.

 

Similar behavior can be observed with traditional audio gear when their grounds are not connected. And one reason why ethernet has isolation between devices. Longer the distances get, more problem it becomes, think about wiring of entire office building with completely separate power feeds.

 

4 hours ago, One and a half said:

A standard filter won't work, because the power supply needs to be isolated as well.

 

I'm not following on this one...

 

4 hours ago, One and a half said:

Apart from a few diversions here and there, 'network noise' needs taming as much as USB otherwise threads like this wouldn't exist... would they?

 

There's no "network noise" as long as things are new screwed up. But I'm happy to see the network noise things demonstrated in DAC output measurements. So far, I've successfully measured DAC analog output noise reduction by using NAA-type devices instead of direct USB connection from computer.

 

4 hours ago, One and a half said:

I grabbed a GS108 (S2)

 

This is one device that works OK, but not something I'd recommend. By default it has a floating wall-wart PSU, although I have such (GS108Tv2) in one place in the house, but it is powered using PoE (the reason I have the switch is because it supports running from PoE). Generally I recommend switches that have proper metal chassis with built-in PSU, and high quality gear like stuff from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise or Cisco. And I have 802.3az aka Energy Efficient Ethernet aka Green Ethernet support as requirement, this allows to use lower transmit power for shorter cables. At the moment my listening room's local distribution switch is Zyxel GS1100-series 16-port model GS1100-16 (good MTBF and low heat production too). 24-port model gives you in addition two SFP slots for optical connections.

 

Other than that, my recommended switch for home audio use is HPE 1820-series. But I think I will soon upgrade mine to 1850-series which can do 10 Gbps switch-to-switch links.

 

[firedog]

Maybe we can go back to the topic of the thread - the M5?

[One and a half]

21 minutes ago, firedog said:

Maybe we can go back to the topic of the thread - the M5?

By all means. If Bricasti can expand on this post a little more. Bricasti advised the M5 connected to the network, with routers et al will work, and a single wire connection couldn't. 

This could mean, the M5 is incapable of having the IP address set manually, there's nothing in the manual or in the reply from the vendor. I appreciate to make connections simple for everyone, but simpler is often better.

[One and a half]

48 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

 

This is one device that works OK, but not something I'd recommend. By default it has a floating wall-wart PSU, although I have such (GS108Tv2) in one place in the house, but it is powered using PoE (the reason I have the switch is because it supports running from PoE). Generally I recommend switches that have proper metal chassis with built-in PSU, and high quality gear like stuff from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise or Cisco. And I have 802.3az aka Energy Efficient Ethernet aka Green Ethernet support as requirement, this allows to use lower transmit power for shorter cables. At the moment my listening room's local distribution switch is Zyxel GS1100-series 16-port model GS1100-16 (good MTBF and low heat production too). 24-port model gives you in addition two SFP slots for optical connections.

 

Other than that, my recommended switch for home audio use is HPE 1820-series. But I think I will soon upgrade mine to 1850-series which can do 10 Gbps switch-to-switch links.

 

 

This is very interesting, and beyond the layman (moi). To illustrate, there are pitfalls for audio transmissions for USB and for Ethernet, and not as plain sailing as you originally make it out to be. No real problem, I'm satisfied and done.

[Miska]

1 hour ago, One and a half said:

This could mean, the M5 is incapable of having the IP address set manually, there's nothing in the manual or in the reply from the vendor. I appreciate to make connections simple for everyone, but simpler is often better.

 

I prefer IPv6 for various reasons, and one is that it can do address autoconfiguration for local network without external service like DHCP. So each device can figure out their own unique address within the same subnet.

 

But in any case, most of these devices, like Sonore microRendu too, are intended to be connected to normal home network with DHCP and internet access (for updates). And there are really no clear objective reasons to do otherwise.

 

[plissken]

8 hours ago, One and a half said:

Imagine 2 switches and an off the shelf shielded Ethernet cable between the two carrying traffic. The switches are metal clad driven by wall warts. If CAT cabling is CMNR by design, what shield current would be between the two switches?

 

If the shield is floated then none. A floated shield is there for minimizing interpair loading. I.E. you have a bundle of 50 runs. 

[plissken]

6 hours ago, One and a half said:

To illustrate the point above there's voltages on chassis of Ethernet gear that if left uncontrolled end up where you don't want them at the DAC. 

For fun, I grabbed a GS108 (S2), two UTP cables, a PC and its power supply, being a typical small network into the main 16 way switch. The PC was on and running and there was traffic on the switches, nothing heavy, just I'm alive.

 

Measured voltages 

V1 [S1 to S2] Metal on the RJ45 - 18.1 Vac

 

V2 [S2 to PC Frame] - 13.9 Vac

 

V3 [PC Frame to S1 RJ45 Metal] - 8.2 Vac

 

0V on the GS108 and the PC 0V - 15.2 Vac

 

All the above were at ~75Hz, and measured on the LoZ setting of a Fluke 289.

 

V5 [PC Frame to DDC Frame via USB Cable] 1.0 Vac @ 50Hz. (Must get around to tying this to ground).

 

I couldn't find a STP cable on hand to try, but could repeat the experiment again in a couple of days.

 

No wonder @Miska advises against STP, since the chassis of the different parts of the network are at differences of voltages and significant ones at that, enough to create the worst ground loop for low and high impedance leakage currents to travel wherever they like. As far as the bits go they couldn't care less, but these voltages end up in the processing of streamers and DACs and care I do about these. To create the same potential for these devices would be a nightmare, the best alternative is provide a switch in front of the Ethernet renderer or streamer to kill and leakage currents. A standard filter won't work, because the power supply needs to be isolated as well. I believe Uptone is working on something that would work in this situation .

 

Apart from a few diversions here and there, 'network noise' needs taming as much as USB otherwise threads like this wouldn't exist... would they? 

 

After measuring these voltages, I didn't bother getting the radio out again to do a proximity test, forget shield currents in the microamps, there's milliamps of loop current here.

 

Ethernet Voltages.pdf

 

 

Wifi works really well now days. 

[Miska]

12 minutes ago, plissken said:

Wifi works really well now days. 

 

All networking works generally very well, like copper/optical ethernet which has been around for ages and even in very large installations much more challenging than home. Even in very challenging environments like industrial.

 

Recent WiFi standards have so much bandwidth and with addition of MIMO it usually works well for audio. Only in very congested city areas with lot of apartments and such, it can become challenging. But usually even in those environments 5 GHz band works well because it doesn't go so much through concrete walls and thus it is much more "local".

 

[One and a half]

10 hours ago, plissken said:

 

 

Wifi works really well now days. 

Let me inform you on the M5 specifically with wireless. The M5 has one USB port. Currently, there's a choice, connect a wireless dongle or use the USB port as an output to a DAC. I prefer AES3, but some people would like to use wireless but come unstuck when connecting a DAC to the USB.

[One and a half]

10 hours ago, plissken said:

 

If the shield is floated then none. A floated shield is there for minimizing interpair loading. I.E. you have a bundle of 50 runs. 

I will try the STP later, I found one. Floating shield invites RF as an antenna. Just about all industrial process signals use shields grounded at either end with protected grounds separate (but aggregated) from the main protective ground.

[plissken]

13 hours ago, One and a half said:

I will try the STP later, I found one. Floating shield invites RF as an antenna. Just about all industrial process signals use shields grounded at either end with protected grounds separate (but aggregated) from the main protective ground.

 

Not true... Read Seimons "The Antenna Myth".

 

I ran data cabling in large machining and stamping plants (Ford being my largest client). It all 'Depends' on how the shields are tied. Not just CAT cabling either. Alarm wire, RS232, RS485, GPIO, SCART, etc etc etc.

[plissken]

13 hours ago, One and a half said:

Let me inform you on the M5 specifically with wireless. The M5 has one USB port. Currently, there's a choice, connect a wireless dongle or use the USB port as an output to a DAC. I prefer AES3, but some people would like to use wireless but come unstuck when connecting a DAC to the USB.

 

Sound like another streamer could work better. 

[davide256]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

Sound like another streamer could work better. 

I'm not seeing anything impressive for hardware here vs a femto Auralic Aries. Whats there to get excited about?