@mike2019,
Just the home setup please.
Just the home setup please.
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.
470 responses Add your response
@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. |
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. |
I am not sure how this is at all relevant to the discussion?
|
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?
|
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? |
@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 |
@ 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/ |
| Post removed |
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.
|
@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
|
@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? |
@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. |
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 |
This is an interesting take, going beyond just power supply noise injection, and considering signal injection. I will throw out some thoughts at you w.r.t. that. Please take them as just that, arguments, not attacks on the precept.
Just some more thoughts to ponder on to add to your valuable post. s almarg9,123 posts10-29-2019 9:14amAs someone having extensive experience in digital (and analog) design, although not for audio, it is very conceivable to me that a network switch can make a difference sonically. Not because it affects the accuracy with which 1s and 0s are received; not because it affects the timing with which those bits are received; and probably not because of most of the reasons that are likely to be offered in the marketing literature of makers of audiophile-oriented switches. |
I am new here and I don't find this argument/post very inviting. As opposed to inviting discussion and trying to get to the bottom of a topic that is obviously interesting to the community, it appears to be attempt to shut down discussion and force a particular view/outcome. This seems more akin to Facebook groups. I hoped to avoid that here.
|
| Post removed |
While I am under no illusion that data transmission in USB, Ethernet is at all being affected in a home network given the astonishingly low bit error rates typical in a home and jitter is simply not an issue at all in any modern USB DAC and not at all in Ethernet. But, I cannot rule out, especially given I am also under no illusion that all audio products have good analog design, that noise injection through the power supply could make a difference in some circumstances. In a well designed products it should not/will not, but I cannot assume that is ever the case. The type of power supply noise generated would not be negated by high end cables. They could even make it worse by providing a lower impedance power path. Then again, some like the "airy-ness" that noise provides.
|
Nothing like a rebuttal full of invective and bile. Remember to always insult with your rejoinder as it aids in your position. @allane, keep in mind that there are no 1s and 0s. Would it be so simple if the simplified, textbook explanation were true. In the real world, the 1s and 0s are electrically represented and noise is a great big factor in its distortion. Though this link deals with USB transmission, the thinking behind it applies to all transmitted data: https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/audiocadabra/1.html Just the first two pages are all you need to read to get an idea to work with. And, yes, you can spend too much on better gear, but you can also spend too little. All the best, Nonoise |
Allane: The power is not the data being transmitted. Foolhardy purchase at best, but if your confirmation bias makes it an expensive need, then bully for you. This is the perfect place for industry professionals to plant the seeds of "need" with buyers. Especially if it is those with a seemingly endless flow of disposable income.It is everywhere on Audiogon. |
It seems that if there is an audio performance benefit from network hardware, that maybe it’s because of “electrical noise” as opposed to “data bits”? Power supplies seem to make a difference with both analog and digital designs, and most of these “audio grade” switches focus on electrical isolation. This would explain why fiber and optical connections can benefit some systems. Maybe instead of counting bits we should evaluate the way power is implemented? The bits are there, but the power they are riding on could be better? I think this also applies to USB from a computer to a DAC, which is why I’ve been testing/listening to some USB interfaces for my Apple Mac. https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/apple-music-mac |
Here is one of the most useful forum threads about this topic. I only post on Audiogon because there is no way I can keep up with all the forums and websites, but I have found this thread to be very informative: https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/30376-a-novel-way-to-massively-improve-the-sq-of-computer-a... It’s good to see more computer/network based audio solutions being discussed here on Audiogon. |
@asvjerry I am a little slow so I am not sure I get the gist of your post. However, I will say that over the past 3+ years of using a mircoRendu while my computer did a few things such as, browser windows open to mostly static computer programming URLs (no video), maybe RDP into another computer, email, and not much else, I could not see a degradation in the sound of my audio system. My system seemed to be operating at a steady state of quality even with the computer having varying degrees of CPU/disk use. I attribute this nice steady state to the microRendu. Now the OpticalRendu is promising to deliver what I did not even know I was missing by eliminating Ethernet noise from the equation. That noise currently flows into my microRendu via RJ45 Ethernet cable (not computer noise). So this is supposed to give some improvement to the sound of a network connected system. The fact that the Rendu's are all ROON READY is an added bonus. I am not an expert in the Optical networking but the audio benefit seems easy to understand if the premise of an Fiber Optical cable not being able to transmit electrical noise is to be believed. |
Someone, somewhere, at any given time will find a way to play upon your fears, doubts...paranoias at the extremes of ones' psyche'. Your computer wouldn't work if the bits 'n bytes weren't 'keeping in line', so to speak. Your reading this while likely 'multitasking' on the box; consider what's silently going on for you to do this. Discussions of this vein frequently remind me of the ancient acronym PEBKAC Problem exists between keyboard and chair. How about a new one? EAIEBLE Esoteric audio issues exist between listener ears 'Fixing them' tends to cost a lot... ;) |
https://www.sonore.us/systemoptique.html I just looked at the link above again and read about option 4 for Fiber Optical to an audio system. Currently, in my office, I use my electrically noisy (or busy) computer with a microRendu. I could skip buying the new optical capable network switch mentioned in my above post by doing the following: 4. Sonore opticalModule OEM/DIY - The opticalModule has an SFP fiber optic transceiver and can be installed directly into computer server.It makes sense that this would be an option if Fiber Optical cable eliminates all electrical noise. It would not matter if the computer is electrically noisy. BTW - my cheapo DELL audio computer is silent (but internally busy). |
I should have used the terminology that @allane posted above to be clearer in my explanation. @grannyring You can use a RJ45 switch which also has optical fiber connection. Take a look at the following product. I will buy this one for $200 and replace my current RJ45 only switch with the RJ45 + Fiber Optical switch. https://www.ui.com/unifi-switching/unifi-switch-8-150w/ The following url should give a good description of how to get fiber into you audio system. The product listed above fits as the "existing optical Ethernet" in the SystemOptique described below. https://www.sonore.us/systemoptique.html If you have a Lumin X1 DAC (expensive) you can connect the Fiber optical cable directly from the Ubiquiti switch. I am not aware of any other DAC that have this fiber input. I think this could be the future for streaming DACs. The Sonare SystemOptique is used for USB DACs and what I will buy. Most likely the Signature Rendu SE Optical. I currently own the older Sonare microRendu and it has worked flawlessly for over 3 years. |
@yyzsantabarbara I agree, Ubiquiti is wonderful networking gear. I’ve been using them for several years with great success. I use the Switch 8 (150watt) a lot for central and local switches. It works great to POE their standard Switch 8 or to deploy as a local fiber switch with their XG switches. The UniFi Controller interface is excellent. |
Understand. One would need to run optical inside the house .....between the walls etc... to use this medium. Correct? Or is it traditional ethernet cabling into one side of the new optical ready switch and optical out of the switch? My server does not accept optical? I guess I am confused as to how optical would work in many current systems. |
@grannyring I am not sure if you are referring to the OPTICAL connection on a DAC or the OPTICAL I am referring to which is analogous to RJ45 Ethernet cable. https://www.ui.com/accessories/fiber-modules-cable/ |
That old argument of miles and miles of this and that before our system is nonsense. Just nonsense. If it were true then nothing would matter in our audio rigs. Power cords, speakers, cables, caps, resistors, power supplies, conditioners, tweaks...,none of makes a difference because of the miles and miles of stuff before our system. Nuts! The last few inches even help! |
@steakster thanks for the link. I was considering the following. https://www.ui.com/unifi-switching/unifi-switch-8-150w/ I am a big fan of Ubiquiti as a company. |
| Post removed |
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? The entire purpose here is to optimize one’s musical experience, be it with component upgrades, setup or tweeks. The 30 day return policy means one can see for themselves if it improves one’s system. My cable tv signal has traveled through miles of wire and like many I have to isolate it from that system to avoid hum and there no reason to believe other forms of isolation can’t be beneficial in a high resolution system. It’s as if we’ve returned to the days where people claimed nothing more than lamp cord was needed for speaker cabling, or the fake audio “science” crowd that uses test gear improperly to prove the gear they sell is superior. I don’t believe that you can measure the benefit of having a black border around a projection screen but to deny that they enhance the perception of contrast is absurd. |
At one time I was thinking that an Ethernet connection on a DAC was the future. I even started a thread a few years ago asking what others thought about this. However, today I hear the talk of noise on the Ethernet line and why that may not be something to hookup directly into a DAC and pollute the DAC with noise. So I see the reason why these audiophile network switches are showing up. Yet, is there not a different approach to this Ethernet noise issue? I have being following the Sonare SystemOptique discussions and it seems to me that using Ethernet OPTICAL from the network switch to the DAC maybe ideal (such as with the Lumin X1 DAC). The OPTICAL cable cannot carry electrical noise. The solution that would be more practical $$ wise and also with more DAC options would be the Sonare Signiture Rendu SE Optical. https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/sonore-opticalrendu-signature-rendu-se-optical-review-part-2-... With a Rendu it does not matter how noisy your computer is. Why spend so much time and money eliminating all that noise with custom audio servers (computers), audiophile network switches, expensive ethernet wire, etc.. when the OPTICAL wire kills all the electrical noise. The Optical Rendu uses USB for the "last mile" to the DAC. |
| Post removed |
Agreed, of course. But that has no relevance to what I have said in my previous posts. What the switch will modify are the spectral characteristics of the signal that is provided to the audio system, which may result in differing effects on ostensibly unrelated circuitry that is downstream of the system’s Ethernet interface. I don’t know how to say that any more clearly than I already have, and I’m not sure why those who contend that a network switch cannot affect sonics keep focusing only on delivery of the data. Regards, -- Al |
Go analyze some packets captured from Wireshark or other network sniffer and tell me there is something in there that affects sound quality. Header information, source and destination, timestamps, acknowledgements, and data. Nothing else..... The packet either arrives there or it doesn’t or a resend is tried. A switch is not going to modify or enhance the data residing in the application layer of a packet. I could possibly see SQ being affected on an overly chatty network. Where frames are constantly being sent out of sequence, multiple packet retransmissions are occurring, or bandwidth is insufficient. A switch is not usually the culprit of such occurances. |
