Can the digital "signal" be over-laundered, unlike money?

Thanks @david_ten  for posting this question. I presume network clocks solely affect sound stage, imaging, perhaps resolution. Some presume my issues with the added clock in audiophile switch is due to inferior quality of said switch. So, if the clocking in this switch is doing its job, I should have more precise sound staging, imaging, more resolution. My listening experience with switch confirmed my presumptions of what added clocking would do, more precise sound stage, imaging and a bit more resolution, in my case sound stage, imaging overly precise. It seems intuitive to me that a better/more expensive switch and/or clock would only increase that precision, this I don't want.

If this not the case, please explain how a higher priced, supposed higher quality clock/switch would improve over my switch/clock. Are there flavors of switches/clocks, do network appliances affect things like timbre, tonality, micro and macro dynamics? I've not heard any of these kind of changes with any of my network improvements, solely sound staging, imaging and resolution changes.

I've heard of the sine wave vs square wave issue, don't know if this is issue in this case.  And the attack and decay issue is an interesting concept, this allied to micro/macro dynamics. The defects in sound staging I'm hearing could be interpreted as micro dynamic issue, the overly precise imaging/sharp outlines mimics micro dynamic decay, but in my case solely sound staging related, no perceptive change in dynamics.

I'm certainly not alone in hearing defects with audiophile switches. Just not sure if their issues are the added clocking or something else?

Its also possible router mods have diminished my need for switch/added clock. I'm powering with over spec'd LPS (amperage supply greater than need) and added rfi shielding. Entire network and USB chain post server already optimized.

And my digital surpasses my tt setup by quite a large margin, and only sounds increasingly analog as resolution increases.

@lalitk  I don't know if you're referring to me when you keep on mentioning mac mini server. Yes, I use a server in mac mini clothing, but its bespoke in execution. Internal power supply out, Uptone MMK DC internal pc, Uptone JS-2 LPS, upgraded RAM, and SSD, nearly all services disabled, including going into DOS command disabling even more services, no wifi, wifi antenna removed, extra RFI shielding, modified for two ethernet cables. This is not a mac mini, has no capability of general service computer. This is Frankenstein or diy server, not some low resolution junk shop solution. Not saving any money with this build, add labor and research, this route not for most. Not lacking resolution with my digital setup, any and all defects will be illuminated. And this not at expense of timbre, tonality, micro/macro dynamics. Very close to my vinyl setup in sense of ease, far higher resolving power with the digital.

I believe I mentioned this in prior post on another thread.  I think we can all agree optimal network performance requires galvanic isolation, proper timing, maximum jitter reduction, shielding from emi/rfi. With so many choices of equipment to address these issues, highly likely every streaming solution is unique. What works for one situation may not work for another, this especially true at the margins when one has optimal or near optimal setup already. One may upset delicate balance they may have achieved by adding another network appliance.

One can speculate or presume my issues with switch were due to inferior clocking, poor implementation, inferior parts. Perhaps a higher quality switch would further optimize my network, perhaps not, only insertion of such a switch would provide empirical evidence.

At this point I question how does one know when network is optimized? If one's system is providing high resolution, natural timbre, balanced tonality, freq extension at both ends, wonderful micro and macro dynamics, precise and natural sound stage, imaging, is that not proof of optimized network? Is there a point where we can say enough is enough?  The conundrum is this is one of those known unknowns, the reason so many are never satisfied. We can't know if our present networks are optimized until we've tried any number of other network configurations.

While I try never to say never, I'm at the point where I'm satisfied with present network, other bigger fish to fry. My take is until we have all fiber solution, I'm done.