+3 steakster
Network Switches
Here are a few...
Melco S100 (just announced) https://www.melco-audio-masters.com/uploads/1/0/1/5/101505220/mel_2073_s100_a4_2pp_info_sheet_v3.pdf
SOtM sNH - 10G https://www.sotm-audio.com/sotmwp/english/portfolio-item/snh-10g/
The Linear Solution Reference Audio Switch https://thelinearsolution.com/ref_swtch.html
Feel free to add others.
Melco S100 (just announced) https://www.melco-audio-masters.com/uploads/1/0/1/5/101505220/mel_2073_s100_a4_2pp_info_sheet_v3.pdf
SOtM sNH - 10G https://www.sotm-audio.com/sotmwp/english/portfolio-item/snh-10g/
The Linear Solution Reference Audio Switch https://thelinearsolution.com/ref_swtch.html
Feel free to add others.
468 responses Add your response
It appears that some posters here don’t know the difference between obtaining optimal sound vs any sound. Perhaps, their systems aren’t resolving enough to demonstrate improvements. Unfortunately, these posters are polluting other member’s threads with distracting noise.I am assuming this is directed at me. If so, I it would be cooler if @david_ten, the person, who started this thread, would say my posts are annoying. Anyways, the points I am making about Fiber Optical into an audio system are likely going to be the discussed in depth by others in the future. The first Network Switch listed by @david_ten has Fiber Optical built-in. Wouldn't it be interesting to understand why it exists and how it relates to an audio system? Melco S100 (just announced) https://www.melco-audio-masters.com/uploads/1/0/1/5/101505220/mel_2073_s100_a4_2pp_info_sheet_v3.pdfI certainly would be interested if @David_ten tried Fiber Optical into his Denafrips Terminator USB connection. I know he said he has optimized his USB connection. BTW - Here is another "Audiophile Network Switch" that showed up on my Facebook ad's. https://stereo-magazine.com/article/audiophile-network-switch |
@allane — no, I don’t have any experience with Ruckus as it pertains to audio. But they have such a clear advantage when it comes to access point technology, I think it would stand to reason that their switchers don’t suck as compared to others. But again, I have no personal audio experience to say they’re better or worse than any others. |
@yyzsantabarbara. I very much appreciate your posts. I have been reading on the subject and the new Sonore Opti products. Great stuff. I have a question. I don’t want to sell and buy a new dac and streamer, but I want to experiment with optical ethernet. My Innuos server/streamer only has conventional ethernet inputs and usb output. However, my SOTM Switch does have two SFP ports. I am thinking of going optical ethernet out of the SOTM switch into the Sonore optical module to conventional ethernet cable into my Innuos server. This would give me the benefit of lower noise through optical isolation right? |
@atdavid, thanks for your thoughtful and knowledgeable comments on my post. Almost exclusively, the claims are that Cat-6/7/etc. "sounds better". While that claim may not be accurate, Cat 6/7 will allow much higher signal edge speeds, which would lead to more noise injection by your proposed method. Very true, of course. But I would expect that once the spectral components corresponding to those edge speeds reach high enough frequencies, whatever “high enough” may be in a specific case, increased amplitude of coupled “noise” would be outweighed by decreased ability of the circuitry to which it may couple to respond to those frequencies. Even for these custom designs, they would use off the shelf ethernet drivers to ensure compatibility and they are forced into a specific impedance. I would expect most use off the shelf ethernet transformers as well. Putting my response simply, none of this stuff is perfect :-) Putting it less simply, I have no specific knowledge of the differences in impedance (and also bandwidth) that may exist between various off-the-shelf Ethernet drivers and transformers, e.g., what the +/- tolerances on those parameters usually are. But I would assume it likely that the +/- tolerances on impedance are wide enough to potentially affect the spectral characteristics of VSWR-related waveform distortion, with the length and impedance tolerance of the cable connecting the network switch to the audio system probably also factoring into those characteristics. And consequently the spectral characteristics of “noise” corresponding to that distortion that may couple into susceptible circuit points may vary as a function of the particular network switch, the cable, and the receiving transformer and its surrounding circuitry. With variations in the internal physical layouts of different designs conceivably also having significant consequences. Outside of the high frequencies, which can get in, but are also the most likely to be filtered at some point, the subharmonics which could be in the audio band or modulated down are going to be mainly a function of the data itself. If I understand your point correctly you are implying that coupling of data-dependent “noise” into susceptible circuitry has a greater likelihood of being audibly significant than the contributors I mentioned, namely spectral components corresponding to risetimes/falltimes, waveform distortion, and noise per se. And if so the likelihood of there being audibly significant differences between network switches is lessened (or perhaps even eliminated) since the data would be the same regardless of what switch is being used. That’s an interesting point. In typical circumstances, though, eight-bit bytes are being communicated in a matter of just a few nanoseconds, and most or all data bits are presumably toggling much of the time. So if, as I would presume, the edge speeds of those toggles, and the susceptibility of downstream circuitry to the injected “noise” corresponding to those edge speeds, as well as waveform distortion resulting from less than perfect impedance matches, as well as noise introduced by the network switch and its power supply, are all likely to vary significantly among different systems, cables, and network switches, it’s probably anyone’s guess as to which of the four contributors we have mentioned is likely to be most significant in a given application. The bottom line, IMO, is simply that the reported anecdotal evidence supporting the notion that network switches can affect sonics to an audibly significant degree (examples being the two cases I described in my initial post in this thread, which were provided by members for whom I have developed considerable respect over the years) does not seem to me to be beyond the bounds of technical plausibility. In any event, welcome to the forum, and thanks again for your thoughtful and well stated inputs. Regards, -- Al
|
I think there are things that can be dismissed out of hand in audio, but many that can't, this would be one of them. I have not read about anyone doing specific matching on ICs / Transformers, but I have to expect the variance is as big in the cables, hence matching would probably be a pointless exercise. Generally at the receiving end of Ethernet, IMO, you are not getting too much ringing, more issues with softness of the edges due to bandwidth limiting with perhaps a bit of reflection, but usually buried in the signal. Of course, that is with typical 5/53e. Cat 7 would likely be prone to worse issues. This is based from work I have done in industrial ethernet applications. W.R.T to below, most modern ethernet connections would be switched, and with the low data rate for audio coupled with 100mbps or 1gbps links, it would appear somewhat as regular timed bursts with some jitter on those bursts of course. In my heads calculations say those burst rates would be firmly in the audio frequency range.
|
| Post removed |
@ grannyring The best advice you can get on interfacing to the Sonare Optical module is by Sonare themselves. Jesus and Barrow, from Sonare participates on the Audiophilestyle.com Sonare Forum. The reason it would be smart to email them or Small Green Computer (reseller of Sonare gear) is that the compatibility of the SPF ports with the Sonare Optical module has not been tested extensively. This is new gear for them. The links I provided for Ubiquiti gear was shown to work on the review I linked to. I would guess that your gear, which is well known, has been tested with the Optical module. The great thing about this gear is that it is not too expensive, other than the top of line single box Signature Rendu SE Optical. https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/forum/24-sonore-sponsored/ |
@audionoobie and jnorris2005 and @ cakyol Save your breath guys, you are hitting your head against a brick wall. There are those who even believe that a different Ethernet cable or USB cable can 'improve the audio". I am afraid that no matter how much you try your best to explain to them the difference between analogue and digital, it is just fingers in ears and "la,la,la,la,la,la,la", " your equipment is not as expensive as mine", "your ears are not as good as mine" and then pages of things that can affect an audio signal Even though Amazon, Spotify and Netflix all use generic, mostly in-house manufactured Ethernet cables ($5 tops), and even though the music has passed through miles of cable and dozens of switches and has travelled the final 2 miles from my local exchange muxed with my email and with my telephone system on audio twisted pair past at least three generators, and is then demuxed, sent wirelessly to my music server, apparently I then need a special switch and special cable for the last few feet !!!! From AQ's data-sheet for their most expensive d-Link switch in the world............. "The sound becomes generally clearer, more live and gets more space. Improved transient reproduction, more vivid resolution of fine detail. Due to the increased transparency, e.g. the breath in voices or the fingerplay on the strings are more perceptible. The bass is more contoured and more colorful. In addition, the three-dimensional image of the sound reproduction is improved. The stage appears to be wider and deeper." So how does their switch decode the digitised audio, apply all of these 'enhancements' and re-encode them to digital? @emailists You said "To the people that believe an isolated switch cannot reap sonic benefits, I wonder why they are on an audiophile hobby site In the first place? " Well, I am here to find information on devices that can make a difference. Amplifiers, speakers, DACs etc. Not the nonsense stuff |
mike2019, Once you figure out the Amplifiers, speakers, DAC’s etc, come back for further education on streaming, network switches and Ethernet cables. You have a long way to go but you’re on a right path. @audionoobie, @jnorris2005 and @ cakyol Do you guys stream music, if so would you please share your streaming setup? And does any one of you use Vinyl as prime source of listening? |
While there are some who mistakenly believe, and others who mistakenly promote that bit timing matters in Ethernet/USB transmission, as has been noted above, frequently, any of the technical discussion in this thread has centered around analog noise injection and potential downstream effects. While I expect this to be limited in Ethernet due to inherent isolation, there is still the potential, and for USB, the potential for noise injection is very high and very real. Now, do I personally believe that expensive audio ethernet cables makes any difference? No and in fact they could be worse. For USB, there is enough noise injection, that a cable could make a minor difference good or bad. On the other hand, with USB certainly, reducing power supply and AC ground noise could certainly have an impact as would isolation, and with Ethernet, if there is noise injection into the audio, then isolation will help.As Almarg has pointed out, the "claims" of some of these "audio switches" is questionable at best and probably misguided, however, that does not mean that other aspects of last few feet transmission could not have some impact on the usually flawed designed product being connected. I also don’t go for these childish "your system/ears/etc. is not good enough to tell the difference crap", but I also don’t go for these calls to authority about my "awesome experience", when it is not awesome for the topic, and if you are going to do that within the framework of this discussion, I would not be using "software engineer", or "network technician" because that communicates no knowledge w.r.t. noise free analog signal reconstruction. Perhaps you could enlighten us on what the packet arrival rate would be for an digital audio signal over ethernet?
|
I am not sure how this is at all relevant to the discussion?
|
I would like to know why I would need a switch as discussed here, where I would use it, and what it would do for me. My knowledge of switches is basically non-existent, hence the dumb question. If this is not the thread for this then just say so. Currently, my system is played through a digital-only source using either streamed Tidal or my ripped library, both played through a Roon interface. My system now sounds better than through any of the high end CD players I have owned so I don't really have a problem but I am curious whether I am missing out somehow by not having certain peripherals. The source set-up includes running Ethernet cable from my Orbi router (high speed Comcast) directly to an Antipodes DX Gen3 server, then Ethernet cable again from the DX to a Metrum Ambre (Roon endpoint), then I2S from the Ambre into a Metrum Adagio DAC. I would like to know what I am missing, or how my sound could be improved by having a switch somewhere in that chain? I simply do not understand the purpose of the switch. Thanks for any helpful information. One off-topic thing I find interesting here is the possibility of optical cabling as an interface. The Ambre (Roon endpoint) will accept an optical input and connects to my DAC using I2S so I am curious if inserting an optical interface would offer any improvements. |
@atdavid "I would not be using "software engineer", or "network technician" because that communicates no knowledge w.r.t. noise free analog signal reconstruction" Oh my goodness ! get into the 21st century. A network technician should know everything w.r.t. noise free analogue signal reconstruction. The problem is that audio engineers have still to learn about digital transmission. |
@mitch2 My knowledge of switches is basically non-existent, hence the dumb question. If this is not the thread for this then just say so. Not a "dumb question" and certainly appropriate for the thread. Hopefully another member/poster will comment. Family is in from out of town and I haven't had time to spare. I'll be able to catch up this weekend. |
No mike2019, really, a "network technician" would not need to know everything about noise free analogue signal reconstruction. I am not sure how you can even make that claim. Tell me, in the course of your employment as "network technician", how many 10’s of products have you designed the circuitry for, laid out the PCB to reduce noise analog / digital interaction, worked out the packaging/ shielding? There is a big difference between the skill set for "network technician", and product/system development for low noise analog signal reconstruction. I think you will find that most who question the basic premise of digital data transmission for audio transmission are not engineers. mike20197 posts10-31-2019 9:30am @atdavid |
I used to think ethernet cables could not possibly make a difference or improve sound quality. Well after trying A SOTM Cat 7 cable, it was clear this particular cable made an immediate and quite substantial improvement. My SOTM switch and Innuos server are not poorly built and I am left with empirical, direct experimental observation, evidence that this particular Ethernet cable, in my system, made for a nice improvement in sound quality. I know my system’s sound very well as I play music for 6-10 hours every day. Not hard for me to detect changes in SQ. I build and sell USB cables and have compared and meticulously jotted down the sonic differences in these cables. They are very real. When developing my USB cable I tried all manner of conductors ranging from stranded to solid core, silver to copper to silver/gold, 24 gauge to 16 gauge, cotton vs PVC and Tefton dielectrics. I also tried various shields on the +5v Vbus as well as on the entire 4 conductor assembly. In most cases the differences in sound quality ranged from subtle to quite obvious. The materials matter and impact the sound. The build design matters and impacts the sound. Again, I am not learning this from books and theories, but rather through hard work and actual first hand experience. I have done the same with parts such as capacitors and resistors as I also mod gear for customers and myself. Many think all these parts sound the same as long as they are in spec. Many great and talented audio designers believe this. They are incorrect on this point however. Most likely because they have spent the hours becoming expert in other areas such as design and building of electronics. I am not skilled at design and do not possess the knowledge of these designers. Not even close. I do however consider myself expert on parts and their influence on the sound character of a given piece. I can only claim this has I have done the work, spent the countless hours learning through doing. All of this to say that ethernet and usb cables do change and impact the sound of our systems. They just do. Frankly, the parts in our switches and power supplies also impact sound quality. Yes, even in digital electronics including switches. The parts in these switches impact the sound never mind the brand or maker of the switch. Some text books may say no, but actual empirical evidence says otherwise. |
@atdavid
When did I say I was a network technician ? That was many years ago. More recently I have designed and installed networks for the likes of TV and radio studios. Besides which, if I discovered that one of my tecnicians did not know exactly how sound was encoded into a digital signal, transmitted and then decoded back to an audio signal, he or she will be looking for another job How can a switch adjust the audio encoded in a digital signal passing through it ???? This is the sort of thing you really must try to learn about. IT CANT |
@lalitk Server - old I5 Linux server with 2 x 1Gig external disks added Music room - Amp, DAC, speakers Living room - 4K TV and sound system Bedroom 1 1080p TV Bedroom 2 1080p TV Conservatory - stand alone system (Bose) Network extender/repeater Network switch all cables are generic I can feed, simultaneously, Netflix 1080p to bedroom 1 tv, Netflix 1080p to bedroom 2 tv, 4K H265 file from video server to 4K main TV in living room, Flac music files to music room and to the conservatory There is no way on earth that any of my video or audio can be improved by network equipment or cables........ none |
If you challenged me, I would probably go out on a limb and say that no, your technicians probably don’t know the underlying protocols for audio transmission over ethernet very well, but that is a moot point. As I, Almarg, and others have stated so many times in this thread, which you seem to constantly ignore, is that it is not about digital data transmission, it is about noise injection into end equipment via the data lines and/or power supply lines when USB is being discussed. However, it is not accurate to say that nothing done in the digital domain for audio can’t effect the analog outcome downstream. Packet rates for audio over ethernet are right in the middle of the audio bandwidth which could lead to power supply pumping in the downstream product due to varying power requirements in step with packet arrival. That pumping of the supply then coupling to the DAC section. At a switch level I could break big packets into small packets to change the packet arrival rate and the signature of that pumping. mike201910 posts10-31-2019 9:30am @atdavid
|
@atdavid " As I, Almarg, and others have stated so many times in this thread, which you seem to constantly ignore, is that it is not about digital data transmission, it is about noise injection into end equipment via the data lines and/or power supply lines when USB is being discussed." I am not ignoring it, I am just pointing out that it is all about digital data transmission and how ridiculous it is to say that eliminating noise injection can, for example , "enhance the sound stage" and why is this only a problem in an "audiophile's" home network and nowhere else in the world I am sorry but you just continue to show your complete lack of knowledge regarding digital audio. Mine is very extensive
|
I personally on this thread have never used the word "sound-stage", and would not attribute a quality that is almost exclusively a function of speakers to noise injected into the analog section of a component. However, I also know that even audiophiles don’t know the proper words to describe what they are hearing often, and I know technically that a change is possible, so I am not ruling out it is occurring, and I do rule out many claims made in the audiophile world. I find it rather hilarious though that you imply I have a "complete lack of knowledge of digital audio" and you are an expert when I would pretty much guarantee my comment about power supply pumping due to packet arrival rates never even occurred to you. Your statement w.r.t. noise injection shows a limited experience set. You may have a large experience set at a high level, but your comments show a limited knowledge set at the component implementation level. These issue are not limited to home audio. Better quality industrial USB data acquisitions units have internal isolation. The ones that don’t are prone to measurement error and noise due to ground loops. In higher noise industrial environments, ethernet over fiber is not uncommon due to data loss issues with wired communication. Other than "you are wrong", and that all bits are received, without issue and that bit timing is not critical, a fact that is actually not disputed by many in this community, I have yet to see evidence of your experience. mike201912 posts10-31-2019 10:46am |
I must say that I find it amusing that one of those claiming that cables and switches can enhance digitised audio can ask for 'evidence' when refusing time after time to have their perceptions put to a proper test. very droll Experience and qualifications ? I am the guy with years of experience trusted by recording studios and TV studios.... and you are the guy who thinks that a switch can change the fidelity of a digitised audio stream passing through it........... hmmm Natural selection will eventually put these bogus switch and cable manufacturers out of business by removing their patsies as, presumably, it is the same people who believe the cable and switch manufacturers rather than believe experts and facts who will also believe, for example, the ads for Miracle Mineral Solution rather than believe the FDA. They will carry on drinking very expensive bleach to their last breath, while telling the medical experts that they don't know what they are talking about. I give up. some people just do not want to learn.I have just found a forum where pseudo science and ridiculous claims are forbidden I won't be here to see your reply but thanks for a (reasonably) civilised discussion :) (and I am still looking for anybody to explain how a cable or a switch can adjust or change or enhance a digitised audio file passing through it. Just take a while to think about the impossibility of that claim) thanks see y'all |
You will not be missed by me, at least, because frankly, you are technically ignorant. You are the guy trusted to put in network equipment and run cables. You are not the guy trusted to design the audio equipment, nor the guy trusted to write the protocols for the audio, or anything that gets into anything technical in depth.
Bye Mike.
|
Steve, the guy that designed the etherRegen has designed many of the chips used in standard switches, so I think his credentials and experience far outweigh any here or the doubters who claim these things don’t matter. Also ethernet is not just for streaming audio. All my music is on local drives. Another crazy thing that illustrates how counterintuitive audio quality can be is that UpTone has found that the etherRegen seems to benefit from breakin. (When comparing a prototype to a newly assembled one) This seems to make no sense (at least to me as a non engineer), but yet it is. Perhaps there is something else about the prototype vs assembled version that can explain the difference. Also the level of system does make a difference in whether or not someone may receive a difference. There is so many opportunities for coloration and loss of resolution in a system (especially the analog volume control and digital volume control) From a video perspective there are details not readily visible on a 55” monitor that are visible on a huge projection screen, and I would liken a highly resolving stereo to the large screen when details are exploded and now audible. Just last night I was listening to Springsteen’s Seeger sessions (a well recorded acoustic album) and was comparing a 16 bit WAV file with the 24 bit flac. (All 44.1). The WAV sounded better. Once I unpacked the 24 bit flac to WAV, it now had more detail and was more intimate than the 16bit WAV. This is using a Mac Pro tower with 64 gigs ram and 6 cores so the computer isn’t using much of its horsepower decoding the flac. Much of audio is counterintuitive, and with no (or lacking) explanation and yet these differences exist for people with the systems and the aural experience to hear the nuances. |
From what I can gather from the links to the 3 switches mentioned in the OP the sotm switch is not a managed switch but a basic level 2 switch so I can’t see anyone being able to manage changing packet rates. I haven’t found as much on the other 2 but they look to be basic level 2 switches as well, perhaps someone has more info on them. |
@mitch2, in simple terms I would put it that a network switch that is typically used on an Ethernet network in a home environment can be thought of as a port expander. The Ethernet ports of multiple devices can be connected to it, and it would provide a path for communications between any two of them. Typically it would determine the device to which to send data “packets” it receives from one of the devices based on local IP addresses that are assigned to each device by a router. The router being one of the devices connected to the switch. Although routers commonly include switch provisions themselves, supporting several ports. Obviously you don’t need that port expansion functionality in the application you’ve described. But as you’ve seen I and Atdavid have proposed explanations for why some audiophiles have reported finding that inserting a network switch into the path between their router and their audio system’s Ethernet port has been sonically beneficial. In your case my guess, and it’s just a guess, is that since your DAC communicates with the upstream device it is connected to via I2S chances are that inserting a network switch further upstream won’t be worthwhile. But as a very inexpensive experiment you might consider purchasing a metal-enclosed network switch, such as the Netgear GS305, and inserting it into either of the two upstream Ethernet connection paths you described. A similar predecessor of that model was reported by two members in the thread I linked to in my initial post in this thread to have provided significant sonic benefit when inserted between their router and their Bricasti DAC. Best regards, --Al |
I would like to know why I would need a switch as discussed here, where I would use it, and what it would do for me. @mitch2 Buy a cheap second hand Cisco 8 port switch from eBay and connect it via Ethernet to your router. Connect your streamer etc to your network switch rather than directly to the router. The result may surprise you. |
Thanks guys. There are indeed other devices connected to my router by Ethernet cables, such as a smart TV and an Apple TV box so what I believe you are implying is that a separate switch will perform the switching duties better than my Orbi router. To make sure I am clear, should I run a single short Ethernet cable from my router to the switch and then connect the various TV devices, plus my Antipodes DX server, to the switch....is it that simple? If I have it correct, then I will give it a try and report back. Assuming it sounds better, am I to understand the next step that would further the sonic improvement would be to purchase an "audiophile" switch - isn't that the topic of this thread? |
No, not better switching duties, but perhaps better noise isolation. mitch22,069 posts10-31-2019 6:12pmso what I believe you are implying is that a separate switch will perform the switching duties better than my Orbi router. |
My post was in reply to "there is no way the digital transmission can impact the audio" .... It was a thought exercise to show that yes, in fact, the method of digital transport can have unintended consequences that present themselves in the analog domain. I highly doubt something like this is implemented in any of the "audio" switches ... most of whose claims, other than reducing power supply and EMI, are questionable. The pumping of the power supply rail with packet arrival is real and something I have seen in non-audio devices.
|
... should I run a single short Ethernet cable from my router to the switch and then connect the various TV devices, plus my Antipodes DX server, to the switch....is it that simple?@mitch2 What I suspect would be best is to leave the TV-related devices connected as they presently are, directly to the router, and to try (a) inserting the switch between the Antipodes and the Metrum, and then (b) inserting the switch between the router and the Antipodes. And comparing results between (a) and (b) and what you have now. Assuming it sounds better, am I to understand the next step that would further the sonic improvement would be to purchase an "audiophile" switch ....? Perhaps. But I don't think anyone can predict with a great deal of confidence that there would be further improvement, given the many component, cable, and system dependencies that are inherent in the explanations I and Atdavid have stated. Best regards, -- Al |
This feels like a rather heated thread and so I am sure that my opinion will rub some the wrong way, but that's fine. I am not a technician but I have spent a great deal of time and money over the years trying to make my digital as good as I can, and I'm very satisfied with where I am, and have a very high-end analog system to match against my digital (to keep me honest). Going all the way back to my experimenting with different Macs (Mac G5 Pro vs. others, for example)...a common thread in every single improvement that I heard appears to be related to clean power and associated power isolation from other components' dumping power back into the system. The G5 Pro, in spite of it being a much older Mac, flat out sounded better than newer ones, all other things equal. Much, much forum involvement concluded that different Mac models did indeed sound different to each other, and the best explanation was the power supplies used in each model. Fast forward a decade and there's a Computer Audiophile thread that's now over 500 pages long, much of which is focused on the improvements to be had through both clean(er) power and also reclocking digital signals. Much of it may at first seem silly and even counter-intuitive, but I have experienced positive improvements by much of what is discussed there (not all). There are no absolutes, so the engineers among us that want to challenge this please do, but a well-designed linear power supply vs. not-clean switching supply for example, anywhere in the system, very often adds SQ improvement. When you hear it, you will know it, and if you don't hear it, you will likely doubt this as proverbial "snake oil." This finding could be for digital signal transmission (switch, USB regenerator, digital-to-digital), or even a DAC. Similarly, I have heard improvements in USB cables and ethernet cables (some). When combining many of these "tweaks," you can absolutely get a lowered noise floor, improved sound stage (both width and depth), often tighter and more realistic bass, and you will find yourself listening to your system at higher volume levels than you did without those tweaks. If you measure the DB with a meter, you will objectively find that you are in fact listening to your music at louder levels (peak) because you CAN and want to to hear all the benefits these "tweaks" can provide, and without the raised noise floor, it really doesn't FEEL louder. It will feel much more relaxed yet dynamic and live at the same time. It will actually be addicting. In the case of digital regenerators, I don't know whether the realized benefits in my system were with reclocking the actual digital signal or due to the removal of electrical noise due to better power to the device and filtering of upstream electrical noise. Likely all. I don't really care if I'm honest--I just care that the sound is improved. I have begun experimenting with optical network isolation both to my Roon server (a modded Mac Mini) and to my OpticalRendu, and I can say that you should try these applications to isolate electrical noise from your DAC, and listen for yourselves. Send the products back if you don't hear an immediate improvement. I predict it will be immediate for you. I am not pushing any particular products, I'm just telling you that they work, even on top of linear supplies and digital reclockers. It all matters. If you are clinging to a claimed scientific reason why there's zero chance any of this can improve the sound in your system, unfortunately you're going to miss a lot of opportunity. |
It all matters in digital is 100% correct! The DC cable also matters from the linear power supply. The parts in the LPS matter. I am trying the OpticalRendu very soon as I am confident it will matter and help sound quality based on all the user comments I have found. This is a fast moving medium with many innovations ahead of us to enjoy. |
As an electronics engineer, I do believe that noise on the Ethernet connection (really any connection to your audio equipment) could have an audible effect on the sound quality, but trying to fix this at the network switch seems misguided. You're just providing more opportunity for noise to creap back in between the network switch and your audio gear. It seems to me that you are much better off investing the same effort (dollars) as close to the final conversion to analog as possible. The DAC and/or streamer is a much better place to eliminate noise from the network connection than the network switch. |
mitch2, we dont use switches to imrove audio. I use it so that I can bridge multiple devices onto a single 1 gb/sec ethernet link. That goes to a wifi router. I have netflix, jazz radio and yamaha vtuner all conected to my amplifier, tv and a streamer. So I have ONE gb/sec ethernet wired connection and I have a netgear switch in betwen which bridges the different mac addresses. For people who do not what "bridging" means, search google for "difference between routing & bridging" to find out. |
Based on my experience in the networking field and 50 years of audio tinkering, I truly believe that audiophile network switches are utter nonsense, designed solely to bilk gullible audiophiles, and those that hear a difference do so because they REALLY, REALLY WANT TO. That being said, no one is listening to reason in this thread, nor is anyone listening to the counter claims - as silly and uninformed as they are. This thread is becoming a shouting match with no possible resolution. Signing off. |
