I'm using a D-Link switch into a EtherRegen (with an AfterDark PSU & Clock) via a Signature Ethernet Cable. Coming out of the EtherRegen I use a basic fiber optic cable into my streamer. (All connects/cables not mentioned are upgraded.)
Simply put, should I upgrade the switch or does the fantastic EtherRegen clean up the switch's audio shortcomings?
I own the Silent AngelBonn 8 switch. It replaced my Netgear switch, which was operating properly. I power the Bonn 8 with my HDPLEX LPS. I bought the HDPLEX for my Nucleus+, and had a spare output so it was a no brainer to power the switch as well. Is it better than the Netgear? I think so. My system sounds amazing to me and I am willing to go this far to improve my digital front end.
I added all Supra Cat 8 cables to and from Modem, switch and Nucleus. I do have a generic 35' run to my audio room downstairs, but then use Supra again into and out of my EtherRegen and into my streamer.
I use an ifi Powerbar to for all the computer equipment with iFi power cord. And of course the computer equipment is in another room on another circuit.
None of these tweeks cost a fortune, and I believe each adds. If some think otherwise Oh well! :)
One of the things Hans at Audiophool did on the Cisco 2960 was remove the internal power supplies and added a 5.5/2.1 dc connector for a linear power supply.
Thanks for weighing in on importance of ‘everything matters’ in a high resolution streaming setup. BTW, you have a gorgeous system! Wonderfully balanced and I couldn’t help drooling over your Garrard 301 with Reed 3P tonearm. One of the top 3 tonearms under consideration for my upcoming TT setup.
So who has owned the Bonn 8 and is it that much better than a standard Amazon $30 switch and 2nd is the LPS required to use? Looking for actual users please.
There are too many variables to possibly account for with streaming audio. Again, my humble op. The streamer, the DAC, the type and design of the cable connecting the two let alone the quality of the internet service, router, switch, location of all the aforementioned....
For example, for better or worse, we have ATT Uverse which means our household internet comes in through a single "box" (combined access point, receiver, and network switch). The main router supplied by ATT sits next to it. They are in our family room. My dedicated listening room is forty feet away and on the same floor. I had no to run an ethernet cable under the floor joists to my listening room. So I have a repeater router plugged in in the basement with a short generic ethernet cable to the above switch with a twenty foot generic ethernet cable running under the floor joists closer to my listening room and up through the wall to an ethernet receptical. Is that optimum? Nope. But with my Aurender W20 connected by a custom Analysis Plus S/PDIF cable to my SW1X DACIII Balanced and using Qobuz I am very happy with the sound quality compared to my pretty good vinyl rigs (see my profile if interested).
I find it interesting that in so many of these posts on the subject of digital the people posting with opinions don’t have their systems listed in their profiles and don’t reference them. How do we know if your opinions are compromised by loudspeakers placed right up against the wall with a huge flat screen in the middle due to WAF?
And then add into the equation that the technology involved is relatively new, particularly with the streaming side of things. Who was relying on streaming just five to six years ago?
The amount of things you guys are trying is astonishing. But none of it works, and a lot of it is counter to how Ethernet works. For instance, for audio listening (not two way like voip), latency is irrelevant. The change in latency matters however, and if packets arrive out of order. Another things, the only possible outcome of taping batteries to an Ethernet cable is that you introduce CRC Frame errors, which the will force the switch to discard the frame, and higher level protocols to trigger a retransmission.
pro audio applications use enterprise equipment, not made up cures but introducing voodoo into the chain, and adding things.
maybe it is just me, but in general for my audio setup, I like to Keep It Simple, the fewer components, the better, since adding will only add to the signal, which means you have modified the recording in transit from source to speaker, and that is not audiophile grade.
You have done some interesting stuff. But I haven’t heard you say anything about the differences you have hear in your system as a result of your changes. What have you observed? Reduction in noise floor? Dynamics? Small difference, big?
The first switch was a Cisco 2960. Had mods done by audiophool.nl
Last month bought a Cisco SG110D switch. I needed one with a small footprint. Have sent it to Fidelity Audio in The UK. They have put one of their C4Mk2 clocks in it, and changed a couple of capacitors.
@scottfraser NAS storage makes sense. As far as recording and mastering…there are so many poorly recorded albums out there that no amount of fixes by the end user/listener in their system can address these issues be it mastered over Ethernet or direct.
Studios, at least some, also use basic cables and mid fi monitors. Then there are recording studios and engineers that are so anal about the quality of the product they put out that they use the best possible gear. What does all this mean to us as end users? In my opinion - absolutely nothing. We’ll pursue getting the best sound we can and that includes fixes and tweaks.
Now we tend to get carried away in the process and go deep into the woods but still see just a tree or two as opposed to seeing the entire forest. That’s a good point to pump the breaks and reassess…do I continue to add crap in an attempt to make a mediocre component sound better than it possibly can or do I stop and just upgrade that component? Realizing when that is is what will get you to the next level. We’re all guilty of missing that mark…
Didn’t mean to get philosophical here but that’s about how I look at it. You may see it differently.
@audphile1 in many ways. Common method would be storage for a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) on a NAS or external file server. More sophisticated use would be recording equipment , mixers, DAW’s etc supporting DANTE which runs over IP/Ethernet.
@snsI apogize, my mistake. My question should have been directed to @jerrybj(please share your Cisco mods).
Otherwise, thank you for your post. I agree with everything you said. Kind of like the early days of vinyl; we've come a long way. Like you, I am optimistic.
@vinylvaletI don't have Cisco switch, can understand the mix up, one can really go into weeds with streaming and optimizing networks, as we have in this thread.
The problem as I see it, is segregated expertise between dac and streaming component designers. I don't have a problem with dac designers as long as they provide a first class port, be it usb, spdif or network for streaming dacs. I DO have issue with server designers who mostly give us lame, second class outputs. Low processing power, ports connected directly to relatively noisy motherboards with poor clock implementation, no isolated power supply, just what are we paying for! Optimized OS and a fancy case is about it. Sure some of them provide outboard lps, but I'm talking about lps for individual ports.
So, because of these limitations we're forced to get various rendering decrapifiers and conversion schemes, or go to streamers to avoid the decrapifiers. Streamers come in many flavors, one needs to to their due diligence to avoid mismatched components and/or reach full potential of dac/streamer interface.
And then we have the network itself, we still await that magical bullet, the least complex, best universal setup. I suspect, over time, as more attention is paid to audiophile network solutions these innovations will be forthcoming.
Ultimately, it would be nice to see more integration between dac, streaming/server and network designers. More simplified and universal solutions would be good.
I wonder how much time the Engineers building modern recording studio's spend on the audio attributes of the Ethernet network connecting their recording equipment? My guess would be about 3 ms.
Look out for upcoming Network Acoustics Rubicon switch. A box like ENO inside a streamer / server would serve as a solid foundation to noise containment. Tweak geeks like us will always find a way to improve upon existing standards 😉
I guess the InnuOS Phoenix Ehrerregen is the most credible attempt by a manufacturer so far. Disappointing, though that there seems to be no common clock between the two Phoenixes (Etherregen, USB), the server and the DAC in that model.
again: agreed. Given the substantial impact of the 10m clock on the Etherregen as well as the contribution of the Ocxo-switch I am not convinced that mere filtering suffices, though…
You’re so right. I would like to see a completely isolated Ethernet chamber with some kind noise filtering tech inside streamers / servers. Essentially a ENO or MUON filter type approach built into every audio streamer / server would prevent some of us jumping through hoops to eliminate noise 😊
good analogy, only difference: I prevent muck from coming in rather than water leaking out😇. Scary though how every little bit helps. You‘d think a decent designer could do better!
Glad to hear it‘s working. Although it sounds like overkill, I use an Ethernet isolator (EMO EN70-HD) directly at the streamer for good effect (l.e. after the Etherregen‘s moat) Don‘t know why but it works a treat. If you want to go further in overkill tape 2 AAA Bateeries parallel to the cable into the streamer with the + pole pointing to the streamer. (again, don‘t ask me why, but it works)
I also highly recommend an Intona Isolator on the USB connection.
Digital transmission is anything but sorted and mature. It takes lots and trial and error.
@wsrrswthat’s awesome to hear!
I would not change anything at this point. Just make sure you use the best Ethernet cable between the EtherREGEN and the streamer.
People should concentrate more on feeds directly out of modems. This is most common weak link I see...
I have tried to address the situation.
I have my modem attached to a modded Cisco 2960 switch. Then (Cat5?) ethernet cable running 10m (can't replace this cable unfortunately) to an ethernet outlet.
Have a Lan isolator connected to the outlet to a modded Cisco SG110D switch, then another Lan isolator connected to streamer.
@antigrunge2@melm& @audphile1 I did ground the etherREGEN and the PSU to my streamer (both having ground screws) with some scrap 12G wire and I'm surprised how more holographic sound is. It's like my speakers took growth hormones. My holographic cherry has been popped. Thanks gents.
I chucked my poor switch and use only the etherREGEN. As tempting as a Network Acoustics Eno or Moun would be that would require a switch.
If it ain't broke don't fix it.... unless you're an audiophile. Right?
@bd no, adding to fix a bad link in the chain never works. Remove the crap out of the chain instead.
basically you are saying that using your iPhone DAC and source into another significantly better DAC will fix the issues with the phone DAC. Not possible.
a switch operates on layer 2 in the tcp/ip stack, and will only check for crc frame errors. A switch doesn’t do anything to correct timing (jitter) issues. That is just not how a switch works, period.
@cakyol Dude.....This is team USA; everyones knows what they are talking about. (Young man you are no better than your father and he was no better than his father. Bet the internet doesn't know that one.) Seriously I have benefited a lot thanks too many. Hans Beelhuysen says one thing someone else says another. Ok. Yup. It's everywhere. Here the pervasive generosity is tops.
I just dig learning about this stuff and like many like my gear (a lot of watch and car folks here too I'd wager) and refining and/or just switching it up. Your honors, my room is the weakest link but that a non starter w/ you know who.
@sns Bingo! That mangled blue junk from the modem to the router could use an up grade. While I'm at it will also get power lines away.
@fredrik222seems to be the only one who knows what he is talking about.
An Ethernet switch either works completely & flawlessly or fails miserably. There is no in between. Since cheapish switches are designed to mostly work in 1 gigabit range, unless you exceed the 802.11 specs they ALL work, for them, audio level speeds is a walk in the park.
Unless there is something electrically wrong with the switch when you first use it, a different power supply will NOT make a difference.
Keep your money and simply buy a $30 switch. It will be MORE than adequate. Just make sure that its existing power supply actually works and make sure the wiring you add is at least category 6 compliant and you will be fine.
I covered my Netgear switch and plug in 3M EMI/RFI shielding absorber, used the filters below on the ethernet cable and put a choke of on the cord from the wall wart.
Again, decisive is what gets to the converter. Latency is not the problem, RFI/EMI, ground level noise and timing errors are. Adding switches helps with those.
@antigrunge2I'm not sure about your point. Regardless of whether ethernet latency issues are a significant problem or not, why degrade latency deliberately (multiple switches) only to have to add more circuitry down the line, easily addressing (debatable) the issue you've introduced or not.
We are talking about the ethernet signal, clearly in the digital domain, not a non-ethernet digital stream decoded by a DAC.
Latency in audio applications is not a significant problem, easily addressed by buffering. Clocking accuracy, though is a whole other matter. Your friend clearly works in the digital domain. Analogue/digital conversion takes completely different priorities than digital transfer
I spoke to an EE friend who is designing next generation 6G hardware; i.e. he knows something about this topic. I asked about stacking switches. He quickly replied that the addition of each switch degrades latency. Pure and simple.
So, the good news; properly dealing with ethernet is important. Apparently, deliberately degrading the signal is changing the sound. Just like other areas of audio, some types of distortion can seem to be a solution for other issues.
The bad news, properly dealing with ethernet is important. Stacking switches is not a solution.
People should also concentrate more on feeds directly out of modems. This is most common weak link I see in many otherwise complex and optimized streaming chains. If one is using long cheaper ethernet cable out of modem, opening oneself up for picking up tons of RFI, not to say relatively poorer sound quality of that cheaper cable. Many years ago I experimented with various quality long ethernet cables out of modem, sq differences even with lower resolution streaming setup I had at time. Then went to longer coax cable in order to move modem closer to audio rig, this allowed much shorter AQ Vodka to replace the cheaper long ethernet cable, very nice upgrade in sound quality. I have also experimented with upgraded power cable to modem and connection to my power conditioner, no great payoff here. Just off top of head, wonder if anyone makes audiophile modem?
This all points to same old dilemma, does the source matter more than loudspeaker argument. I don't enter the argument, as everything matters relatively equally in my book. Which means both the modem and what's feeding switch or router matters greatly, you can't gain back what you've lost. People want to believe all these streaming devices will somehow improve on what comes before, they absolutely DON'T! They only block the nasties of what they're fed, you've already lost some level of resolution by the filth that's infiltrated via EMI/RFI.
@wsrrswi have had very substantial benefits from reclocking both the Etherregen and the DACs conversion and USB link; as mentioned YMMV. Reclocking and fltering are different things: In addition to reclocking I use a DXE ISO plus filter and an Emo EN70HD isolator.
@audphile1Thank you. On it like hot sauce on rice.(I think I know a place where I can sell the gear I’ll be replacing.)
@antigrunge2 My steamer has a "Femto Clock System with precision FPGA distribution" (no idea what ’dat means) and your steamer also has an internal clock too.
Before typing this I nosed around the forum and some think a "master clock" is the way to go and some think two clocks aren’t necessary as the streamer re-clocks. Going the Network Acoustics way re-clocking ins’t possible whereas going the etherREGEN way it is. Chicken or egg...filter and/or clock? Clear as mud.
This segway from the switch question seems like a natural progression as it really all about the signal path into the streamer. Gone are the days of AM radio and flesh colored earphones.
While YMMV on individual setups, the biggest improvements in my case were the addition of an Antelope clock and Zerozone LPS to the Etherregen as wellas adding an LHYAUDIO Ocxo switch with built in LPS in front of it., I don‘t believe that a mere filter can replicate the improvement from better clocking.
@wsrrsw you can try the EE8 from upscale. Their return policy is decent - 60 days.
Check out Hans Beekhuysen’s review of the Eno filter which is detailed with lots of good info on the subject in general and what I hear in my system with Eno pretty much aligns with Hans’ results. He also ran it with and without the EtherREGEN in the chain. He has a review of the Muon switch as well.
If you need help choosing Eno vs. Muon reach out to Network Acoustics. Rob from NA recommended the Eno for me based on my set up (components and speakers). Nothing but positive experience to report from my interactions with Rob.
You might end up with less clutter and better results. A slam dunk in my book!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
