Nonoise,
Just making the point that reality and what we think are often not objectively related. It applies to all aspects of our thought process. John makes the very same points going back to Helmholtz. This understanding is not new and I sure did not discover it so I wonder why it is not well understood? Actually I don't wonder as our public education only teaches to the tests. We have a population with degrees, but no education in the broad classical sense. James Burke talked a lot about that. Really great lectures.
Now I could greatly get going with what is wrong with our simplistic "SINAD" kind of measurements and chasing one number engineering. I will argue back in the early transistor days, to get SNR and THD down meant you usually got a lot of other things fixed. Eventually by the 70's, we found out band-width was the driver for IM. ( Slew/TIM just different ways to look at it) but advertising stayed on the same bandwagon as no one has yet come up with a "musicality" scale. But we do get these limited static tests and they do tell us something, so I argue they are a place to start. In my experience really good sounding equipment measures at least respectively. I can learn a lot from Kipple loudspeaker measurements. ( Yea, I have built speakers for 45 years too). Not everything but a place to start.
I want to know other things because I have designed and built amplifiers and I know what they mean. Few audiophiles are engineers and I don't expect them to be, so Madison Ave, needs some simplistic "bigger is better" number for the rest of the world. After all, we can't trust our hearing and I am sure not going to trust some You-Tuber who never has posted a less than glowing review of anything. Been burned by that myself. Paradigm, Fosi, Parasound, SMSL, and Toppinig at least. Great reviews. Sounded like crap. On the bright side, I would never have found JDS, Schiit, IOTA, March, Tyler, Geselli, or other direct sales who are doing great work. I might have not paid attention to Hegel, Atoll, or even ATI. Gad, I might have a Denon AVR instead of my Anthem! Without You-Tube I would not know how turning down the level in JRiver fixed 99% of my DAC problems.
The only traumatic event I have had listening to music was when I had a CM labs amp that could get unstable and I would hear the heat sink pop and the amp go silent when I was about a foot from the power switch.
Cora,
You can read my posts or not. Up to you . There is no test at the end.
Knock,
Remember the old Stax "Nearphones" ? Much better presentation. Big boxes so they did not catch on, but they made use of your full ear. Unfortunately, like all Stax, they really highlighted bad recordings and of course STAX price. I have not heard any modern cans I like so still use my old Yamaha YH-1's. Maybe above a few $K they get better, but I'll never know.
Sigh, the phrase is " Miller time" but for me, that means Highland Gallic Ale. Life is good. Shameless plug for North Carolina craft beers.
|
Deep, you make an extraordinary claim with nothing but your belief and some other you-tuber who has no evidence either. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
As I know how Ethernet works, I know of no way using the science of this universe that suggests layer 1 or 2 can have any effect on your system sound. A poorly designed power supply may transfer some noise, but as that is inherent, a client device that does not deal with that is a bad design. Don't blame the switch. An overloaded network could starve a path of data as IP is not a real time protocol, but a managed switch can mitigate that as well by using QoS. A defective switch could cause high error rates, but that is not what this is talking about. IP ( Internet Protocol) will completely resolve any errors if using TCP as it is a guaranteed delivery. If using UDP, a best effort, well you are not attempting a robust system and any error is your fault and the switch just reads the packets, figures out their destination and reforms packets to send to the correct client. Bits is bits. There is no level, slope, timing, jitter, or magical influences.
If you have any concept of how a switch or cable ( often talked about magic) can effect your sound, please present it. We use Ethernet for life-threat, live-fire, banking ,and nuclear control so if you have discovered some mysterious error, please let it be known. Until it leaves the client buffers in order and stripped of the headers, bits is bits. It has been that way for 30 years and overseen by engineers far smarter than any of us. You do know packets don't even have to arrive in order don't you?
I do agree, the scam of these expensive switches that are just a couple better power supply caps and some encapsulation is taking advantage of folks looking for magic who do not have the technical background. Not everyone does. Last time I looked you don't need a class in networking to be a brain surgeon.
Again, our brains lie to us. They hate to admit we have been scamed and will reinforce belief harder and harder. Sound is real. What we hear is the lie our brain tells us. If you believe it sounds better, your brain will convince you it does. Just it has no bearing on the actual sound.
There are a lot of improvements we can do to our systems. Some well known, some innovative. Some plausible but ineffective. Then there are those that are impossible. Where should one spend their time and money? Possible or impossible.
If you believe in the impossible and want the very best, you can always buy a Cisco Catalyst. I'm sticking with my $35 Netgear. 360 Mb/s download to any of my clients. IGb/s aggregate client to client as my internet is only guaranteed to 300Mb/s. It can stream 4K video without error and streams radio to my PC streamer just fine.
Don't believe me. I did not invent the Internet. ( actually I do know someone who did invent some of the IP stack. He was a DoD contractor I supported when I was a systems admin) Please go read about how it works. Look at what each of the seven layers of the IP stack do. Then explain how anything but an actual dropout can effect your sound.
|
I try to help with facts and reason. Not everyone has mega-bucks to waste on fantasies, but would still like to optimize their music experience. Spend your budget where it counts.
|
Anti,
You don't have to read my posts. You don't have to insult people either.
Do you find any factual error in my post? If so, please point it out.
|
We can leave religion out of this.
One point I never made. Ethernet is a transport layer used to move IP traffic. One can transport IP over other fabrics. Fiddi, old "thicknet" or "thinnet" on top of ATM ( the world backbone) etc. One can use Ethernet fabric for other protocols. But for our discussion, we are talking IP. That is what comes out of our router and switches. TCP is guaranteed reliable. UDP is best effort. Shame on anyone using UDP.
Exactly, what we hear is the results of our brains processing sounds picked up by our ears. Sound is real. Hearing is our interpretation. It is subjective.
The point I am making is no one should trust their brain to be objectively accurate. It lies. Mine is just as biased as anyone. The difference may be that I understand and accept mine is biased where some believe theirs is not. That is one reason to use objective measurements as a starting point. ( not an end point) Seeing may be believing, but it does not mean it was real. I do love magic. Just I limit it to the good old "Blackstone" in your face skill kind.
If you ask a person "which sounds better", you have biased them to determine they are different. As our subconscious ego won't admit we are not good enough to determine a difference, we will make one up. We WILL believe it!
If we fall for something, and I assure we all have, again our internal bias does not want to admit we were fooled, so it will make up the difference and reinforce the decision. This is called "being human"
I see so many claimed "double blind" tests, but never with a sample size large enough to meet any scientific correlation. 5 out of 5 is just as likely to be a statistical guess fluke as valid. To boot, the very nature of a test is again biasing the listeners that there is a difference. Try running a test with no differences, but an obvious "click" to signify a change. You will get not only selections, but attributes ascribed to them. This has been done. Pretty funny actually. And yes, many people are insulted when they understand they were duped. Our ego hates that!
I hope you are aware the lowest confidence evidence in a court of law is witness identification. The law recognizes we can't trust our brains.
We need a lot more work on what clues our brain uses to decide something is musical. Not the same for everybody. I started studying psychoacoustics in college when I noticed music majors had speed controls on crappy turntables, but engineers had expensive speakers and fixed speed tables. Different experiences required different queues. Music majors hate when the pitch is off. I would not have a clue. We need a lot more work on things like our ability to extract information below the noise level. We need more work to quantify which measurements correlate to hearing preferences. Understand why a "perfect" measuring amp like a Benchmark leaves me cold, but my Mosfet sounds more dynamic. Why does my Vidar sit in the middle? I actually know some of the technical reasons and they are not included in classical SINAD type measurements. Some attempts to simulate "musicality" has been included in CHI-FI DACs. "Tube" mode with increased DSP generated even order harmonics. "BJT" mode with higher overall, but odd order closer to even. I heard one. I'll take the clean setting thank you. A clue, but not correct or complete.
Anyway, a layer one or two switch is not going to change the sound. There is no amplitude, timing, phase, or magical parameters involved. They are just not there. It just moves packets and if you read my link below, you will see most of the packet is not even your data. MTU size dependent. Again I challenge anyone, if they can come up with a parameter we do not know of, please please bring it forward. You-tube rants are not evidence. Neither is my hearing nor yours. If you do hear a difference, it is not a difference is sound buy because your brain made it up. Still, if you think it is better, then for you it is better and keep on keeping on. The good news is a "boutique" switch works just as well as my TP-link or Netgear $35 switch, so no harm done other than your bank account.
https://www.w3.org/People/Frystyk/thesis/TcpIp.html
Ethernet is not like PCM where the bits are just the signal and timing does matters. Ah, except on some newer DACs that buffer and re-clock the PCM. Classic case of bias from old very real faults that have been fixed.
|
Exactly. Maybe, with a little factual information, they can pick something that actually matters. Speakers always. More music to discover. Better beer, wine, whisky, etc)
|
Except, there seems to be a contingent here who absolutely, positively, believes they make differences ( or sell them themselves, I don;t know) and do their best to convince other who are happy with their systems that they are wrong and their systems stink unless they shell out copious amounts for snake oil. A big disservice to the community in search of better sound. I try to suggest facts. Then one can decide if they want to feel better or not. Not everyone knows how IP works so it is not hard for the fraudsters to take advantage of them. Just wanting it is a perfectly good reason to buy it. Ascribing magic to it is not a reason to install inferiority to some one else.
I have stated MANY times, if it makes you happy, then you are happy. Real or imagined as everything we hear is actually imagined.
|
Sounds like a few folks here have purchased "audio quality" switches and their ego is bruised. No one likes to know they have been had. That is just being human.
I have provided links to the technical description of how IP and Ethernet work. That is my evidence. It is pretty clear it is impossible. All you need to do is to read it. No viewpoints. No opinions. No hear-say. Technical how it works. IP does not use magic. V64 MODEM error correction looks like magic if you want to dig deeper. But it is actually just math. It even makes GCR backwards error correction look simple.
I have also repeatedly challenged the "believers" to provide any evidence of how a working to spec layer one can effect the audio. Any hind of a path. If there is something we do not know, that would be important. Nope, Only get attacks. Claiming a switch makes a difference is the extraordinary claim so extraordinary evidence needs to come from that side, not the side of established science.
As I have not purchased such snake oil, I have not been damaged, so I would have no standing in a suit against said fraudsters. At least that is what I learned in the basic business law classes in college.
|
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/s A place to start if you want to drink facts instead of Kool-Aid.
If all you want to see is WEB bloggers who don't know any more than you and get paid every time you read their dribble, or are selling the garbage ( all the above, I looked) stay happily uninformed and Pay $600 for a $35 switch .
Fiber works fine. Still carries IP traffic. Still layer one. Just costs more.
|
Actually, I am an engineer, but I referenced the training from CISCO.. You know them. The ENTIRE internet is either Cisco or Huewai. They know a little about it.
All for higher sonics, but you won't get it chasing the impossible. READ how IP works. Then make up your mind. If you are not willing, then keep being taken by carpet baggers. You have been warned.
End.
|
Folks may wish to stay naïve, Folks may wish to learn. Folks may read my posts, Folks may choose not to.
Quick Amazon search:
Budget 50' CAT6e $8.75 Budget twin fiber $29.49
Budget fiber switch $375, Budget copper $21.99
You can use fiber to copper converters if you have fewer clients for a little less.
As I keep saying and one particular person does not seem to read, Fiber works just fine. Passes the same IP traffic but just costs more. A solution in search of a problem.
|
Anyone, please identify, or even a guess what these " other things carried along " are so they could be investigated. DC offset? RF? A ground loop causing client ground noise? All these should be taken care of by the client. Hans is one of the more reliable You-Tubers with professional audio background, but his conclusion is subjective. "Other things" falls under the extraordinary claim category.
BTW, His description of the digital filtering clipping problem is something everyone should read. Also addressed by RME and Chord among others.
I saw how someone measured a higher client clock jitter outputting to the DAC. If this was accurate, the difference was small enough that the temperature of the oscillator module could account for it, it could also mean poor isolation in the client device of the power and grounds. It did not include temperature in the measurement. They did not show if this delta was within the specs of the oscillator. As these were not in ovens, the numbers the suggested jitter was well within the design limits I am familiar with though parts have gotten better since I was in the lab.
The transport layer's job is to move bits from host memory to client memory. After that, all kinds of things can happen. GOOGLE the IP stack for more information.
All things physical that are measurable are not audible.
All things physical that are audible we don't always measure.
Sound and hearing are not the same. Sound is real. Hearing is a combination of sound our ears pick up and our subconscious combined. It is not objective. Not in humans. You may very well hear something and no one can tell you if you do or not, but it does not mean it was physical sound.
Progress can be made only if we rely on science rather than magic.
|
nonoise,
What do you find as a factual fault with my statements? So far, only opinions have been expressed along with less that forum cordial comments. If I have made a factual error, please enlighten me. I try to learn something every day.
If you find my comments old, you are free not to read them. As you seem to believe otherwise and rather than discuss where we disagree, you attack my comments with no supporting facts. I am not going to change your viewpoint and don't care. This thread was to help members who may not understand Ethernet not be taken for a ride. Refer to my opening sentence in the thread or provide factual evidence where I am in error.
I have made NO insanity defense. Please do not make up things I have not said. I This is not insanity, just part of what makes us human. It would be a rather dull world if we were all perfectly objective. In anything. We aren't.
I don't know if they teach this in school any more, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion
If you want to stay only in the audio side, there are quite a few books on psychoacoustics. Search Amazon.
|
More snide remarks. No identification or properties.
|
Still no identification of either factual errors on my part or what the mystery "other things" may be.
|
I agree totally, this forum is audio applications and most are not coms people, but we use coms and as I am one, ( yea, and I too have a stack of classes and certifications) I was trying to help those who are not. If you don't want that help, fine, don't read my posts. How it's made does define how it works.
For your analogy, food is good because the recipe and ingredients are good. Not because some reviewer says so. Electronics are the same.
Disparaging members does not help anybody. A couple members can't help themselves. Your posts are usually far above that.
|
Amir believes classical measurements are the end all. He does not even want to discuss the points made by the lead engineer who designed his test equipment that these classical measures are incomplete. His measurements are well done and can provide some insight as a starting point. He does not believe in magic, and for the topic of this thread, he does understand what an Ethernet switch is. He is a degreed engineer BTW.
Again, if anyone has ANY idea on what these "other" factors carried along are, please speak up. Being offensive is not a valid argument and neither is accursing someone of deception.
|
Those of us who are engineers have pointed to real experts on how Ethernet works. We are fully open to new information that can be explained in this universe. Those who believe in only their ears have offered no argument than to attack others. "Your system is not resolving enough" is nothing but an assumption smokescreen for someone with no argument. I suggest looking up the topic of argument fallacies.
That leaves placebo effect or an extraordinary claim. Many of us understand the placebo effect and that you "hear" what your mind wants you to hear. If you hear it better, good for you. Be happy. To go the step further and claim because you hear it it must be real is where your argument breaks down. Extraordinary claims, that "other things carried along" need some evidence.
Just because someone in an engineer does not mean they do not want to achieve better sound. Instead of making extradentary claims that are outside known physics, maybe it would be more beneficial to understand more on how we hear so you can go down a path that improves the actual sound reproduction.
Ethernet moves bits from one location in memory to another location in memory on a different device where it can be accessed by the client's application. That is all it does. It can't reach past that location in memory because someone wishes it to be so.
Lists of boutique hardware do not change physics. Missing is your test method and description of the resolution of the tests. At what point in client memory are you comparing the data to what point in the host?
|
Hans said he had no idea what it could be, but he THINKS he heard it.
One more time, an extra ordinary claim needs extra ordinary proof.
|
There is a difference between obscure issues and flat out impossible. An advantage of understanding how Ethernet works is I have a better grasp of impossible than those who are still allowing subconscious beliefs in magic.
As I said in POST ONE, if you are a believer, this thread is not for you. It is for those who do not understand the technology to be able to make up their own mind.
Unfortunately, one side factual evidence is still only countered by " I believe so"
If you "believe" and it makes you happy, fine. You don't have to give yours up. Be happy. If ANY even obscure possibility existed for what is claimed, yes I would try one. I await said evidence.
|
