We Need To Talk About Ones And Zeroes

@curiousjim 

I guess parts is parts and pieces is pieces and it don’t matter in what order they go cause it’s all gonna sound the same.

Simply...No.

Most of the conversation so far has been on digital data transmission and receipt.  While the fundmental design of a digital network insures that what was sent ends up being the same data at the end, factors such as the effect of the noise floor on creating data packet resend requests, can effect the timing of the data feed at the final end point.  (In this instance, the network connection at the streamer.)  

What hasn't been really talked about yet is how all the hardware and software "parts and pieces" come into play.  One goal is to reduce (or isolate) the noise floor on the data transmission by using good hardware/software, like adequate power sources, quality connectors and wiring, capable networking equipment, etc. Reduce the noise floor and, hopefully, reduce the data timing difficulties at the end point.  Thus it changes the sound (hopefully for the better.)

Then there is how all the parts and pieces come together after the final network connection at the streamer and/or DAC.  Then the circuit design, the parts chosen, software operating system, firmware, DAC chips, shielding, power supplies, etc. all come together to take the digital data stream and convert it to an analog signal.  Doing this well can be difficult. And it is where the greatest differences in the "sound" of a streamer/DAC come from.

And then you get to enjoy all the different types of chicken nuggets from places like McDonalds, Taco Bell, KFC, and Bojangles.  Same chicken, different receipes.  LOL.

-Jeff

@cleeds 

I having to remember and Google.  It was a few years ago.

The modified DLink was an Aqvox.  I remember that because there was a Linus Tech Tip on YouTube that did the tare down.  I also seem to remember there was a Paul Pang modified DLink that was somewhat dubious (I had to Google this one for the name.)

The Netgear may have been one of the early Silent Angel switches, but don't hold me to that.  

And the Linksys, no clue anymore.  I just remember the pictures because they painted the case a matte black and didn't even mask the open ports properly. On top of that, they just pasted their sticker over top of the Linksys sticket on the bottom. 

honestly, I think there are folks who champion high end streamers whose arguments are the functional equivalent of those who call themselves “Creationists”.  It’s essentially pseudo-science.

If you want to get into switches that are something more than repackaged off the shelf check out the Dejitter Switch X, they have some pretty interesting perspectives on how networks can affect sound quality.

Audiophile switch sellers purchase off-the-shelf switches, ditch the noisy switching mode power supply (SMPS) that came with it, repackage the switch with a small linear power supply (LPS), and sell it at a huge markup.

Your global statement seems untrue, what about Telegärtner, Network Acoustics, Ansuz…. While it’s true that very many (most?) have tried to modify off the shelf switches to  find significant sonic improvements at a more economical cost, results have commonly been marginal if any sonic improvements.  I followed  “audiophile switches” reviews and forums looking for the lowest cost but sonically effective solutions, but seems the costlier alternatives simply perform consistently sonically better.

Why does a costlier switch perform better than a stock and/or a tricked out stock switch?  In this copycat world, manufacturers rarely reveal their findings through their R&D efforts which is vexing for those who try to understand markup “value” - they will never get there.