Cheapest way to enhance SQ with digital streaming

I’m going to revive this thread…

I ordered a Pack of 2 Gigabit Ethernet Multi-Mode LC Fiber Media Converter (SFP SX Transceivers Included), up to 550M, MMF, 10/100/1000Base-Tx to 1000Base-SX with LC to LC Fiber Cable Multimode Fiber Patch Cable, AllChinaFiber Duplex Fiber Optic Cable 62.5/125 OFNR (6FT, OM1, Orange) as well as Monoprice 0.5’ Ethernet cable to try this tweak out. 
Connected it first with my Supra Cat 8 cable out of my eero access point into the first module and the Monoprice from the second module into my Lumin U1 Mini. Allowed the system to warm up. Had a listen and didn’t like it. The new chain imparted a slightly artificial sound, air and details were missing. Overall sounded pretty dry. However I noticed slightly better definition of instruments within the soundstage and better focus. I then returned to the original configuration with the Supra directly from eero into Lumin, it came back to life but that focus was lost. 
Not giving up on it, I changed the config and ran the the Monoprice Ethernet cable from eero into the first module, fiber optic between first and second module and the the Supra Cat 8 from the second module into the Lumin. And I must say, that hit the nail on the head! Everything is in better focus now, better layering in the soundstage, sibilants sound more natural, the imaging is better defined. Bass has more texture, overall images are just more solid with blacker background. 
Now, these changes are subtle but noticeable. It just sounds more natural. Going back will be tough. This is the upside. Now the downside is - more clutter: more wires, each unit has its own power supply, just adds to already a spider web of wires. Have to figure out how to manage/hide these wires. 
Overall I’m pleased with this tweak!

@romney80 - thanks for posting this cheap and effective tweak!

@mre28m5 Glad you had a positive outcome!

I added the OEO pieces per@tksteingraber a couple weeks ago. Plug ‘n play. The audible improvement was quite noticeable... well worth the investment. A couple days ago I found that I had an old IFi 5volt $50 wall wart hiding in a desk drawer. I replaced the stock wall wart on the OEO device closest to my DAC with the IFi unit. As@sns predicted, a further improvement was immediately noticeable. Crystal clear mids and noticeably blacker background. I’m tempted to buy another 5v supply.

Thanks for doing the R&D. I’m enjoying Qobuz now more than ever.

When doing the cheap fiber mod, using  stock wall warts isn't extracting full value of mod. LPS on second fmc is next step, I found lps on first fmc also helps just a bit.

With ethernet solutions, cable quality matters.

I gave up on this mod.  I decided to pull the optical gizmos out and plug the A10 directly into my mesh node with vodka cable and it sounds a bit more resolving and natural than with the optical stuff, and obviously makes for less clutter.   If anyone wants to try this out, feel free to send me a message and I can box up and send you the stuff at a discount.

Good to see more of these comparisons. In future we need to see comparisons of optimized ethernet vs optimized optical setups in same audio system, not sure I've seen that.

At this point, many iterations of ethernet devices, with optical Sonore only device I'm aware of.

I tried the FMC-optical-FMC tweak in my second system in my basement - nothing more than a Powernode driving Elac Debut Reference speakers.  The improvement was startling.  More air and detail, and improved dynamics.  While this system was always musical and enjoyable, the soundstage was always a bit flat.  Now there is more air and space around voices and instruments, and percussion and transients seem much more realistic.

I immediately placed an order for the parts to install in my main system (about 6x the cost of the basement system).  I'm having a hard time discerning any noticeable difference.  

I have different brands of switches going into each system.  Maybe the basement switch was more of a problem.

@sns Yes I  tried removing the FMC set between the router and macbook and had the same poor result listed above using the usb FMC set only between the macbook and DAC.  Back to just using the original FMC setup which sounds great!

@tksteingraber Did you try FMC set between macbook and dac with FMC set between router and macbook removed?

I'd look to dedicated server vs macbook for next upgrade.

Have had very nice SQ improvement adding the generic FMC set between my router and macbook pro.  Tried adding a second usb 2.0 fmc set between the macbook pro and my DAC and I did not like the result.  Crystal clear and extremely detailed but took away the richness.  Fullness and bass were reduced.  Sounded too crisp and hollow for lack of better woods.  Will be returning the set.  Just wanted to share that I guess you can get a little too much of a good thing. Rendu down the road is probably in play but really do like the way it sounds now.

https://www.amazon.com/Transwan-Optical-Application-Backward-Intercom/dp/B07BR5BM71

Generic FMC without lps good start, get lps on second fmc next move, lps on first last move. Opticalrendu would be most effective if rest of streaming setup top notch, if dac is weak link replace that prior. Once all this in order Opticalrendu can bring substantial improvements to streaming sound quality, remember to calculate for quality lps as well, there is good reason why Signature rendu SE commands premium price!

You’re completely on target here. If someone already has an audio grade ethernet switch theoretically addressing noise, can't speak to that. Have been trying to get my head around this simple fiber optic cable change and it’s the biggest audio "upgrade" I’ve experienced. My mono blocks likely played a role here but I’ve been in this hobby for some time. Had the original Sony SACD player (what a tank) and I had that upgraded not once but twice. That was very nice and doubled the cost of the unit but this is simply astounding improvement for under $100.

Understand some folks are looking at linear power supplies and I’m not sure I’ll dive in on that for the moment. Have a Richard Gray and the generic switches are getting powered through that. I do use a battery powered device for the RME ADI-2 DAC and that produced a very nice improvement. So, I’ve had to get up to speed on this whole end of things from the streaming perspective. Eye opening.

Just read a July 2020 Absolute Sound article and there is reference to further improvements using audio switches replacing the generic FMCs with Sonore’s OpticalModule and higher-quality power supplies. That’s a significantly larger investment and can’t touch this bang for the buck. It will for the moment remain an open question. So thanks again for sharing this.

@romanesq that is some serious improvement in your system. I will be honest, I have spent quite a bit on components (a lot), but still, to date the best bang for buck (by big margin) has been fiber optic in digital chain. It might not be for everybody, especially with already very high end Ethernet switches (which also do job of reducing noise) in chain, but I can imagine it will be big improvement in most system. Best thing about them is they are inexpensive to test/ experiment. 

Just installed this inexpensive solution and frankly, I was not expecting much if any benefit. Well, I was wrong. In my system, the impact was signfiicant in its dynamics, soundstage and detail right out of the gate. Last night I made a point of listening to the system and putting some tracks aside for an inevitable comparison.

As it turns out, wasn’t even necessary. For my tube monoblocks system, the impact is outstanding. I won’t belabor folks with lengthy dissertations on the sound improvements because you can discover it for yourself (or not).

My system is 65-watt monoblock amps, the RME ADI-2, McIntosh LS340 speakers, and a 2011 Mac Mini running Audirvana Studio.

Used the basic recipe as stated here with 2 one-foot ethernet cat 8 cables from a Motorola dual wifi router. It’s a stunning impact here folks in what was (as I thought) an excellent sounding system. I’d have a tough time indicating how much but it’s probably on tier with a major component upgrade. It certainly spared me more internal debate about getting a streamer as this has definitely hit the fiber spot here. Hard.

Thank you @romney80! Thank you very much.

@dbphd  You got it. Streamers take ethernet or optical input (in rarer cases), use various outputs to dacs. Streamers can also be built into dacs, like your Ayre in which case they are streamer dac. Your ultrarendu is also streamer. If using usb output on any streamer its also called usb renderer, if using Roon also called Roon endpoint.

As mentioned previously, a server can also be streamer, although simply called server, all servers connecting to dacs are inherently servers with streamer capability.

sns, I'm still confused about the distinction between server and streamer.  To be specific, my router, Roon Nucleus, and Ayre QX-5 (Roon endpoint) connect to an Ethernet switch.  So is the Nucleus the server and the QX-5 the streamer with a builtin DAC?  Output from the QX-5 is balanced analog to a KX-5 preamp.  

A MESH node that serves a remote ultraRendu is also connected to the switch, so I assume the ultraRendu is also a streamer.  It sends USB to an Ayre QB-9 DSD DAC.

db 

@tksteingraber 

thanks!

@mantis007 this is the fmc to usb converter i was referring to…wouldn’t allow me to message. Hopefully this will post.

Thanks @sns ​​@romney80 for sharing your learnings and for replying to my questions. 
I am very new to posting on here and I don’t really have the technical know how or the vocabulary to talk about my setup or listening experience like the most of you do on here. 
I have however managed to drain my resources over the last years into what I think has ended up to be quite a nice HiFi. 

I’m running a Leben cs600x + Sophia KT88’s into Devore 096’s 

I have been auditioning a Schiit Yggdrasil Dac this weekend as I thought my current Dac might be a weak link in my digital streaming playback. 

Well the Schiit certainly was quite a difference in sound and detail but what I didn’t like was it kind of made my system sound a bit solid state, modern and analytical. It  was doing a better job of revealing the music in more detail but somehow the music seemed less musical.  

My fiber optic supplies arrived over the weekend and knowing I have been messing with my system quite allot in the last couple of weeks I might find it difficult to tell the difference, if any, this modification might make I decided to connect it up anyway. 

To my surprise this new Dac is now sounding much more natural in my system. I was expecting to be looking for detail improvements but I don’t think I am hearing them. I do however seem to be enjoying the tone I am hearing and whilst I wouldn’t describe the sound as analogue I would say it has moved in that direction.

Looks like I might hang on to this Dac now. I was thinking I would return it next week and look for something warmer sounding. 

Thanks again and I am happy I tried this out 👍
 

The FMC-fiber-FMC experiment is over for me.   It was a definite net negative to sound quality in my system.  I don’t know why that happened while almost everyone else reported good results because it was the exact opposite for me.  I gave it 4 days of 24x7 powered up and 14 hours of listening time. Although it did improve a little with burn-in it remained very tilted-up sonically with almost no bass. Even worse, the center soundstage was very thin. Anemic even.  It was like listening to Army of Darkness musicians. I went back to my old config and within minutes music had soul and fleshiness and weight and 3-dimensions again.

 I’m posting to let future readers know that your results may be system dependent. But it was an interesting experience!

Also, my system has a Node 2i with the power board upgrade modification and a Mean-Well medical grade SMPS. There’s 130 hours play time on the mod and 24x7 powered up for over a month.  It needed that.  I’ve found the mod to result in much better detail. Maybe the combination of that mod with the FMC didn’t work out even though it all went into a Chord Qutest DAC and a fully tubed int amp.

1. Yes, requires two fiber media converters, two ethernet cables,one into first fmc, one out into bluesound.

2. Shorter is better.

3. Lengths your talking about, no.

Hi Everyone... I am interested in this and am in the process of exploring DAC upgrades for the digital streaming source.

I have ordered the suggested hardware to see if any improvements can be achieved in my current setup. I was wondering if you can confirm with me if I have understood how to implement correctly. 

My setup is as follows:
-Router to blue sound node 2 via ethernet cable
-Bluesound unpacks the MQA files 
-Bluesound to Eastern Electric external DAC via COAX 
-Eastern Electric DAC to amp 

Question:

1. Would I be adding the fiberoptic cable and boxes between the router and the Bluesound?
2. if so does it matter how much ethernet cable exists between the router and the first box?
3. does the length of fiberoptic cable have an influence ie- 2ft Vs 8ft?

Thanks in advance 

Did this today and I am loving this simple upgrade.

@soix thanks for your input. Yep realize the JB is not a DAC just a jitter filter. I was just listing it was on my MAC.  The dash above is the connection change.   The JB has worked for me much better than iFI purifier and does make the Mac sound better with blind tests. (Nothing like adding the FMC’s and fiber cable) I can see how the JB wouldn’t help out in other set ups. Agree the next step up will be a dedicated streamer down the road. Right now pretty darn happy with my Mac with Amarra.

@tksteingraber I’d think installing the fiber stuff after the MacBook would be more effective. Second, the Jitterbug is not a DAC — it just reduces jitter and, frankly, it sucks. It ruined the sound coupling it with my Dragonfly Red, and speaking with an industry insider AQ knows it sucks and is reworking it. And yeah, a dedicated streamer annihilates using a noisy computer as a source. Noise kills digital sound, and a general-use computer is extremely noisy. Just my $0.02 FWIW.

@sns Thank you for your great explanation.  Very easy to follow and makes clear sense of it all.  Still learning a lot about streaming music.  Appreciate your efforts.  My current set up is:  Router-FMC-fiber optic-FMC-Macbook pro with AQ jitterbug-asynchronous DAC.  Adding the fiber made a big difference and it sounds very good.  I was inquiring if fiber could be added between the Mac and DAC.  Seems that my next step down the road would be to replace the Mac with a dedicated streamer with fiber input like the opticalrendu.  

@tksteingraber Not sure what you mean by after streamer. Streamers generally do usb straight into dac, if you converted usb to fiber you'd have to have fiber input on dac. Generally, fiber is used to convert ethernet to fiber, this goes into server/streamer or separate server or separate streamer.

Now if you're talking server, you can do FMC AFTER server ONLY by using separate streamer (examples my Opticalrendu) which has fiber input, usb output to dac. Without separate streamer FMC can only be done UPSTREAM of server/streamer.

I think people get mixed up by all the different words applied to streaming equipment. Servers are most common of streaming equipment, vast majority have streamer built in, if one is using usb or another port direct into dac, this has built in streamer. Streamers are a separate computer that is placed downstream of server and just prior to dac, steamers also called Roon endpoints, usb renderers. Streamers have their own  operating system since they're computer, this allows them to communicate with the Roon Core installed in server, why they're called Roon Endpoint, they also convert ethernet or optical to usb, reason they're called usb renderer.

Three theoretical advantages to separate streamers, one is removing Roon endpoint duties from server, means less processing by computer within server which means less noise produced.  Two is ability to do FMC after server, noise produced by server can be completely eliminated. Three, the usb rendering process is generally filtering and/or reclocking of usb creating improved usb rendering vs. what may be untreated usb coming directly out of motherboard on server, result is better feed to dac, cleaner, less jitter.

 So, one has option of keeping it simple, using general service computer or computer optimized for music, this is called the server. take usb straight to dac. The other way is more complex as I've tried to explain above.

@sns agree this may not get results for all depending on how well your system is already performing.  For me it was a definite improvement way above it’s $85 price point.  I do have LPS on order to see what they can do.  After that, any suggestions on what is the best way to convert to fiber after the streamer at reasonable cost?  Did find a similar FMC set (2) converting USB 2.0 to fiber at $300.   Not sure how much more it will gain. It is sounding really nice now.   Sonore looks nice but pricey...maybe down the road if I upgrade my system. Thanks to all for this enlightening bargain tweak.

You'll find diverse opinions on most streaming products, in the end one has to determine for self. The good thing about the FMC experiment is it can be done for less than $100, where can you find such a deal in audio! If experience promising you can then optimize with linear power supplies, from there you can go to even further optimization with product like Sonore Opticalrendu.

The ethernet route has its own set of basic equipment and further optimization.

Has anybody compared this FMC tweak with using an EtherREGEN device?

@txp1 Not sure I had experienced like you. I had almost immediate improvement. Give it time and see if it changes better. 

@romney80 and everyone else - thanks for the tip!  I installed the two FMCs and fiber this afternoon.  It sounded horrid (extremely tilted up) the first hour but then started to mellow. I was curious about the burn-in time because it’s still tilted up sonically. 

But then I remembered that I had to use a never-used-before power receptacle on my Furutech power bar for one of the FMC wall warts. When I first got the Furutech it had a very long burn-in time. So that’s probably what is causing part of the sonic problem. And wall warts require burn-in.  I’m very optimistic. I’m only 1 ¾ hours into my first listen and it’s rapidly improving.

Anyone else experience sound quality issues during burn-in?   For how long?

It often depends upon the DAC as to whether all or any of these measures will be useful or just a waste of time.

Just as we saw how the use of asynchronous modes neutralized jitter and clocking issues, more and more of the better DACs now include opto-isolation as one of their built-in features.

I'm using the aurender dac.  I'm using stock ps on the fmcs for the moment.  I may try lps but my suspicion of no improvement is essentially twofold--the mesh node is pretty clean and is feeding only the aurender; and the aurender caching the signal is also clean.  My system sounds excellent, I was just trying to make it that bit better. 

The system--sans non-streaming sources-- is joule la 300 ME, into pass X150.8, into quintessence shadow prototypes through siltech cables.  Electronics (except for the amp which goes straight into the wall) are plugged into an mit z center.   

For those using usb out of servers direct to dac, many have found various usb filters, reclockers and better usb cables are nice upgrades. Usb ports direct off motherboards are perhaps weakest link in most music servers.

I'd go this route vs. optical network conversion in front of server. Optical conversion is most likely to work in network AFTER server. Servers are noise makers, the reason why usb filters and optical conversions after server are so effective and popular. Cleaning network prior to server only to reinstate noise produced by server is somewhat ineffective and illogical. I've even found it somewhat ineffective after treatment post server, one audiophile switch I tried resulted in diminished sound quality. On the other hand, adding quality lps to my router improved sound quality, so mixed results here.

@mitch2 Thanks Mitch!

@peter_s 

Does anybody know whether one can disassemble the cables from the clips, run them through smaller holes, and then reassemble onto the clips?

The answer is yes - that is what I did.  Here you go.

@car123 sorry to hear you didn’t get improved results as others have.  It made a noticeable difference for me.  It might be your Aurender cleans up the signal prior to sending it on to the DAC where my MacBook Pro doesn’t and needs the assistance.  Don’t know the electronics science just a guess. I plan to add LPS to the FCC’s in the near future as well to see if any more gain can be enjoyed.

Thinking about running these fiber optic cables between rooms, requires cutting holes in walls or floors.  The fiber optic cables have largish terminations because of the clips that hold the two cables into place.  Does anybody know whether one can disassemble the cables from the clips, run them through smaller holes, and then reassemble onto the clips?

I'll add if your intention is best sound quality, perhaps more clutter provides better sq. Simpler may be betterr, or it may not. I see so many positive reviews on so many setups, if someone has proof of the definitive best setup I'd like to hear it. I'm all for experimentation and reporting results, adds to knowledge base.

As described, this is a simple and inexpensive solution for connecting an audio server to a home network that offers the benefit of immunity to RFI/EMI (except at the converters).  My run is 45 feet long and I am using this fiber into two of these converters.  In my system, I have a hard time discerning a difference between the optical solution and 45 feet of CAT8, but every system is different with different levels of quality and design on the inputs/outputs, connectors, power/grounding, and other factors.  This may not be as much of an improvement for me since my system does not seem to have noticeable noise to begin with.  As some have pointed out, the addition of two converters and two power supplies may have an effect on one's system. I am using LPS to power the converters. I am glad the fiber is working out for your system.  What you described is an example of how to accomplish something without spending big "audiophile" money.

I recently added the Network Acoustics ENO Ag Ethernet filter and their 1M cable.  That filter will not work with the 1000Mbs MC200CM converters so I had to purchase 100 Base converters in order to use the fiber with the ENO.  Also, make sure the fiber cable you purchase matches the converters since there are a couple of different types of cable and I believe I had to switch when I purchased the MC100 converters..  I typically do not like small boxes cluttering up my signal chain, but the ENO is seeming to improve the sound from the incoming Ethernet, although for quite a bit more money.  I am also using a switch after the second fiber converter and before the ENO, with very short CAT8 cables between.

@car123 Try lps on second fmc, this should be worthwhile improvement. Don't need to spend a lot of money on this, Teradak or something similar fine.Not surprised didn't hear much difference with fmc in front of server. Adding switch and fmc after Aurrender would make more difference. But then this requires adding usb renderer.

If one wants to both reduce clutter and optimize sound quality, two ways to go. FMC after server, this requires two computer setup, aka separate server and streamer, both optical enabled. The second is one computer setup, optimized usb out of server. With optimized usb out of server, add on filters shouldn't be needed.  This assuming one using usb dac.

OK, my report.  I bought the two optical gizmos and a relatively short piece of optical cable to connect the two.  Running some supra from my mesh node into the first optical gizmo and then a 1.5 meter AQ vodka out of the second and into my aurender A10 yielded to me on my initial 30 minute session no difference. 

Replacing the supra with the vodka straight out of the node into the aurender yielded more detail and ease, it was a worthwhile upgrade.  But, "cleaning" the digital signal out of my node by "filtering" the signal through the optical devices hasn't made a noticeable difference.  I'll keep it in the system for a while and do some A-Bs but this far its just more clutter.  

Ok have I missed an update to this thread?  I thought it was “Cheapest way to improve sound quality”.  Oh wait …🤔 we all have a different definition of what “Cheapest” means.  I do appreciate all the expertise and education on higher end digital fiber products though.  

Does anybody have a source for a white version of this cable? I will have to run it along my baseboard and the wife won’t go for blue or orange. Also does anybody know if the connectors could be taken off so I could sleeve then reinstall the connectors?  

let us know how it works out.

@car123 I couldn’t find many LPS options on Amazon so ordered a generic from China.  At $50 we’ll see how it works out.  One unit will power two FMC’s and looks credible.  
https://www.aliexpress.com/snapshot/0.html?orderId=8145763266861505&productId=1005003805541887

tksteingraber thanks for the response.  I may give this a go, seems worth a try for $80.  Any recommendations for LPS that won't be disproportionate to the other gear?

Here is some info on adding optical, https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/how-to-optimize-digital-streaming-with-optical-fiber/2