@mitch2 Great. There have been a number of really helpful posts. Thanks to all for their contributions and support of the community.
Let us know which switch you choose and how it works out.
In the past I used the HDPlex to power my switch and other front end peripherals and the differences vs. the stock wall warts were easily discernible. |
#adamaley
We used to make the accredited, especially the M$ network certified guys, work in the back, till we could beat most of the stupid out of them. ;)
|
@david_ten Did the posts / responses answer your questions? Yes, I believe so for now.
Thanks again to all for the help. Based on the responses here and my sleuthing around on the internet, it seems a good start would be to purchase a switch and try it in different positions either near my router or near my Antipodes DX server. I also plan to power my router, and possibly the switch too (if it needs power), using my HD Plex linear power supply that is currently not being used. As far as which switch, it seems a
Cisco WS-C2960G-8TC-L Catalyst 2960 8-Port 10/100/1000 Ethernet Switch is pretty well-regarded and would be a good start. It can be purchased for less than $100 used or less than $200 "refurbished." Should I assume I need 10/100/1000 ports? The port configuration (speed?) seems to make a difference in the price, and they are not all the same. Another "audiophile" switch I came across in my searching that is not mentioned in the OP is the Silent Angel Bonn N8 Switch for about $400 new, from Crux. |
In the past it was the electrical engineer with years of studies behind him and plaques of degrees on his study wall whose domain it was to protect us from ourselves in audiophoolery.
Thanks to computer audio, now a highly certified CCNA can now jump on that high horse too. |
Here's the deal. Any good service should download their stuff to a good sized fifo. Then you are playing it off your SSD and all this network nonsense goes away.
In Linux that's quite simple, I can make a fifo, any size I want, dump the network stream into it, and play it, but I don't stream. ;)
|
LOL. There is one born every minute. ;)
|
“Looks like a gimmick.”
Judging a book by its cover....thanks for gracing us with your brief presence 😉 |
To elaborate onthe post by @atdavid (and which I have not heard in this discussion) is that RJ45 based ethernet is via fully balanced signals travelling on twisted pairs. Thus, just as is the case in balanced (XLR based) analog, any common mode noise should cancel at the destination. There is also no ground . . . So, I am of the mindset that any noise in the DAC is due to defective design on the NIC in that device, nothing else.
Not sure where USB got in the dialog, since that isn't networking . . . . and wifi is out of the context of noise on cables . . . (the focus here seems to wander hopelessly at times . . .). And yes, crap offshore *wireless* devices can spew god only knows what, but that was not the discussion . . . that was *cables* and *switches*.
|
@mitch2 Did the posts / responses answer your questions? |
Ethernet is always galvanically isolated. The connection is through a transformer.
|
|
Things that may or may not make a difference in what I will hear is that with my Roon endpoint, the Metrum Ambre; "The board is completely and optically decoupled from the rest of the Ambre." This is apparently done using; "ultra-fast industrial optical decoupling" and "The network connection is also galvanically isolated." My understanding is the main Pi board and the outputs board are optically decoupled. They also apparently use two femto precision clocks by Tentlabs. |
Let me say first that I'm no expert at all in things digital. But what I know as an indisputable fact is that there is RF noise associated with the interaction between toroidal transformers, amplifiers, other gear and routers/switches/cables. This is easy to observe when I get LOUD obnoxious "motorboating" pulsing depending on placement of my router near my rack. I get very audible noise carried on the physical ethernet cable as well if I'm not careful with placement relative to the rest of my gear. I think none of this has to do with the 1's and 0's being transmitted as part part of the signal and has EVERYTHING to do with shielding and RF/EM interference. Noise can get carried on the physical line (antenna essentially). The materials that are used to shield the cable so it's not acting as a noise conduit is incredibly important. I'm not convinced the "quality" of the bits transferred has anything to do with what my ears are capable of hearing. I think separating the switch from the renderer in the router can reduce RF noise. I used a $20 Netgear switch and observed this myself. I will never pay $2000 for a network switch though! |
There are well made switches and there are switches that were made specifically to be sold at Walmart. Once you pass a certain level of build quality, all switches at that level could be considered audiophile quality. It really boils down to what artifacts outside of the data that the switch brings can be delt with by your streamer/system. Cheap power supplies, cheap caps, cheap ICB's, you get the idea. If your streamer buffers, then speed also becomes not so important. Most isp's use a medium grade switch/modem which they try and tell you you have to rent (you don't) and unless the Audiophile switch is coming straight off the ONT at your house, all your data is passing through a medium grade switch at best. At the end of the day if your system sounds better to you after buying a $1500.00 switch, keep it and enjoy it.
|
Thanks again guys.
Regarding power supplies, I have an HD Plex just sitting around that I can hook up to my router this weekend. The HD Plex I have is totally configurable for different voltages with multiple fixed and variable outputs. I can also verify the output using my volt-ohm meter. I may eventually be able to use it to run both the router and a switch when I get one. |
@mitch2 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? Yes correct. It doesn’t matter if the TV is connected to the router or the switch. Just the audio components matter. The reason I suggested a second hand Cisco 2960 switch rather than a cheap new net gear switch is that: 1. When compared to a cheap switch they sound better. I compared the Cisco 2960 to a cheap net gear and the difference was obvious. The Cisco switches are really well made and have top quality parts inside re clocking, power supply and shielding which seems to help compared to a cheap new switch. 2. I have heard that they are comparable to an audio switch but have never heard a dedicated audio switch so have no evidence here. 3. They are cheap on eBay. In the UK a £400 new price 8 port Cisco 2960 switch is £50 on eBay. 4. If it does not work you can resell it for the price you paid. |
A month ago, I purchased a new streamer as I was certain it was the weakest link in my system. I had previously been using a Sonos Connect modded by W4S. The Sonos Connect allows you turn off its internal WiFi module if using ethernet. I found this gave a slight improvement in SQ - and confirmed to me the benefit of reducing electrical noise in your digital chain and components. I use the Netgear Powerline devices to get ethernet to my streamer. Based on the status lights on those devices, I was linking at less than 50mb/s, and sometimes I would completely lose the ability to stream 16 bit FLAC files - dropouts, lost link, etc. That’s only, what, 1.4 mb/s? Very frustrating, but with the Connect, I could just switch back to streaming via wifi. The digital chain is: Router -> Powerline adaptor -> wall sockets -> Powerline adaptor -> streamer -> DAC (spdif) My new streamer does not have WiFi. I had to solve the powerline dropouts, and I also wanted to reduce noise in the chain as much as possible to get the most out of my new streamer (which was immediately a major upgrade in SQ over the Sonos - even with my finicky and poor networking architecture). I changed out my router from the Comcast router to a Motorola. My wifi performance improved, but the ethernet issues with the powerline adaptors did not. I then switched out the stock SMPS on the router with a Sbooster LPS, and replaced the unknown/stock ethernet cable with the Blue Jeans cat 6a. The powerline adaptors were now linking at 100mb/s with no dropouts and I heard improved sound. Steve Nugent from Empirical Audio suggests "fast" LPS for routers, switches and streamers - anything digital. He stated the Sbooster was "fast", so I went with that one. I think this might be related to the power supply "pumping" injecting noise that @atdavid has brought up. I don’t know, but I do know this change helped. I was reading about audio network switches as a upgrade (to be deployed between downstream powerline adaptor and new streamer). I was having thoughts similar to @almarg in that, as he stated better than I could: "differences in waveform characteristics in turn may, IMO, affect the degree to which some of the RF energy present in the signal may bypass, i.e., may find its way around, the ethernet interface circuitry in the receiving component and affect circuitry that is further downstream".
Knowing the powerline adaptors were probably noisy as heck, going the switch route seemed like it would be less effective than isolation. So, I decided to buy the Gigafoil v4 ethernet filter - basically a ethernet-to-fiber-to-ethernet device that removes potential noise on ethernet cable. I’ve powered the Gigafoil with an Sbooster LPS, and connected it to the network with a Blue Jeans cable on input side, and a higher end cable on the output to my streamer. The results? I totally concur with @parsons previous comment: tighter and more realistic base, lower noise floor, relaxed, dynamic and I can listen to it out much louder volumes comfortably. I have a power cable for the new streamer on the way, as well as a new coax cable. Hopefully, those will be that last upgrades for a while. Sorry for the length of this. I wanted to share some recent experience related to this topic. I totally agree with @grannyring : Everything matters in our digital audio front ends. Everything folks. |
|
Before I go looking at a switch for issues, try looking at all the cables and connectors first, then if you are using copper for your outside network, change that to fiber. When I did corporate networks in the early 90’s, we would verify/signature every cable we would make with a fluke meter and a good number of them had to be reterminated because of too much noise. Also, most home network cables are terminated using the cheap plastic ends. In my house, I use a 1G fiber to the outside (probably much more important than any switch because the lack of noise), and cat 7 cables to my audio and server components. |
Cakyol, I didn't say there was noise on the switch. There is noise on any signal that is transmitted via an electrical connection. This doesn't mean this will affect the decoding of the digital signals. I completely concur that, with the error correction present with Ethernet protocols, the bits are the bits and they are highly likely to get too the streamer/DAC correctly. However, any electrical noise carried along with the signal has to be filtered out or it will have some effect on the generated audio. Whether it is audible is debatable.
What I was saying is that, if you believe it is audible, it makes a lot more sense to provide the best filtering close to the digital to analog conversion than to try to produce super clean Ethernet output at the switch, since you're likely to pick up more noise on the way between the switch and the steamer/DAC.
Again, I don't believe that noise on the Ethernet connection has any effect on the actual digital data that is being transferred. But there is at least a theoretical possibility that noise on the incoming connection could affect the analog output. It's up to the last device in the digital chain to adequately isolate this noise so that it doesn't adversely affect the output. |
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. |
jaytor, there is NO SUCH THING as noise on an ethernet switch. It is DIGITAL. It is either so badly distorted that even the error correction codes (read up Hamming codes, Viterbi decoding) cannot fix it or it is perfect. There is NOTHING In between.
|
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. |
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. |
Yes, good call, even DC cables make a difference. The value you place on great sound may not justify the costs of these items, but if you really want to improve your sound, the options are there, and they work and add up (cost wise and benefits wise). |
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.
|
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. |
|
... 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
|
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.
djones51667 posts10-31-2019 1:57pmFrom 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.
|
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. |
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? |
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. |
Mitch2 10-31-2019
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.
@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
|
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. |
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.
|
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. - I never ever said I would not have my perceptions put to the test. I call out false claims when I see them, but have to admit to potential sources when they exist.
- With almost no exception is anyone claiming here that the switch is changing the "fidelity" of the digital audio stream. You are saying that.
- I clearly, in terms you should be able to understand, communicated how changing packet rate could induce a change in the noise signature in the end-point equipment. Not the data being received, but an analog noise signature via pumping of the end equipment power supply rails. Perhaps you do not understand what I am communicating because you do not have the knowledge to understand it?
- It has clearly been communicated here to you as well, how, noise can be injected via ethernet connections could influence end equipment results. Not the digital transmission which is fairly noise immune, but injected noise into analog sections. Ethernet transformers are actually fairly wide bandwidth offering a path to noise injection.
You say people don't want to learn, but other than slinging insults, you have not communicated one iota of information, nor have you even refuted the actual arguments presented w.r.t. analog noise injection, potential for noise pumping, etc. You just keep repeating the same things over and over again that no one seems to be even disputing. Bye Mike.
mike201913 posts10-31-2019 11:32am
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 simply cannot be taken seriously based on how you handle yourself here. It would be nice to converse with an adult and one who possesses an open mind is also a plus. Oh well. |
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
|
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@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 am sorry but you just continue to show your complete lack of knowledge regarding digital audio. Mine is very extensive”.
People with inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration...isn’t there a word to describe this kind of personality disorder? |
@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
|
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
Oh my goodness ! get into the 21st century. A network technician should know everything w.r.t. noise free analogue signal reconstruction.
mike201910 posts10-31-2019 9:57am @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
|
|
“There is no way on earth that any of my video or audio can be improved by network equipment or cables........ none”
@mike2019,
Thanks for sharing but with that statement..there isn’t much to discuss further. Case closed 😉 |
@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
|
@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
|
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. |
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 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. |
