Bricasti M1 DAC vs PS Audio Direct Stream DAC

@jmw I am now confused.

My Bricasti has the M5 board built in to it. That is how I’m able to hook it up to the router through wi fi.

Ethernet out of pc into local wireless router. Ethernet out of router into the M5 internal board of the bricasti to reclock and convert via i2s to the dac.

Can you draw out a flow diagram to help me understand?

Here is what I thought you were doing (but your most recent post is throwing me off):

PC > Wireless Connection > Router > Wireless Connection > Bricasti M1SE w/ M5 board

If it is different, can you type it out? Thanks.

Jwm 12-25-2017
Ethernet out of router into the M5 internal board of the bricasti to reclock and convert via i2s to the dac. Your telling me this switch cleans up the router. I don’t seem to see how this helps as the signal is handled by the M5 in the dac? How does the switch clean the power? I understand how the dac does it.

Jeff, thanks for clarifying that your router-to-DAC connection is wireless, which of course makes the suggestion of inserting a switch between them inapplicable unless you decide to try a wired connection.

But if you were to try a wired connection, regarding your question please note the following statement in the first of my posts in which I seconded Fsmithjack’s suggestion, and attempted to provide a technical rationale supporting its plausibility:

...RF content of that signal may find its way around the ethernet interface in the DAC and affect DAC circuitry that is further downstream.

By "find its way around" I mean "bypassing."

My point is that no matter how good a job the DAC does in cleaning up the signal it receives, and no matter how good the design of the DAC may be, signals and noise don’t necessarily just affect or entirely follow only their intended pathway. And the waveform characteristics and the noise characteristics of the signal that enters the DAC will affect how and if RF energy present in that signal may to at least a small degree find its way via unintended pathways to unintended circuit points "downstream" of the ethernet interface and the internal reclocker you referred to.

"Unintended pathways" may include things like grounds within the receiving device, parasitic capacitances, power supply circuitry, or even radiation through the air within the component. "Unintended circuit points" may include the D/A circuit itself, resulting in jitter, and/or analog circuit points further downstream in the component, where audible frequencies might be affected by noise that is at RF frequencies via effects such as intermodulation or AM demodulation.

As I see it Fsmithjack has made a well-intentioned suggestion of an inexpensive tweak which he and others he has referred to have found to be efficacious. And what I am basically saying is simply that from a technical standpoint it makes sense, IMO.

Regards,
-- Al

Al I’m using cat 6 from my pc to the router which acts as a local network as it is not attached to the internet. Cat 6 then goes  from the router to the internal M5 board of the bricasti. Which then converts and reclocks the signal via I2S to the chip. I call the router wireless because it allows me to use j river off the pc by j remote to my I pad.

Jwm - your questions are all logical and good questions. I’ve found that we find some things effect the sound of the final product one way or another and quite homestly we don’t really understand or know exactly why other than listening to it.

There is just no way technically a power cable should have the great effect on the sound the way it does. All I can tell you is what I do? I plug one in and listen and then plug another one in and listen and if one sounds substantially better then I trust my ears and go with that one and I’m happy for the improvement. 

Many people today will honestly argue tooth and nail as they know for a fact, a scientific fact with all kinds of meansurements and research facts that prove that Speaker Cables and Interconnects or Power Cables are a total scam and we Audiophiles are the biggest idiots in the word and we are all being played as all cables are pure snake oil.

I don’t know about all their documents and scientific proof I just know they have a profound impact on the sound of my system that I am really glad to have.

Sure I wish they cost less but that goes for all of the stuff in high end Audio but that is why it’s called the High End I guess. 

When I come across a great improvement and I think others might benefit from my experience then I share it but I understand not everyone will want to do it or understand it or even believe it.

In your situation where you use your WiFi Router over a local network to afford you the use of the excellent JRiver JRmote, that’s a good idea. I use JRiver and JRemote also.

Good idea using a LAN and a switch will work fine in a LAN. You are using internet just a local one over your own homes network I think they call that the intranet, but not sure. A switch will work here.

It’s not about cleaning the signal it’s about sending one less dirty.

it is not less dirty because it was cleaned more but a bit cleaner to start with hence has a lower noise floor. Kind of like 2 clean cars. One was dirty and washed and the other never really got dirty but both are clean.

So much and I mean a ton, or even one could say the vast majority of Hifi Audio is about doing the least damage. It has more to do with taking less away or starting with less damage verse correcting or adding something.

When we hear this great improvement by an Interconnect or Speaker cable or even a Preamp and SQ vastly improves many times we perceive that as a great ad when that improvement comes because that device does less damage or adds less or strips away layers or impediments even though it sounds like it is fixing or adding something.

i can tell your M5 boards and your DAC are incredibly sensitive and high powered SOTA devices that will appreciate the cleanest anything you can feed it. Be it Power Cables or power conditioning or interconnects or a stability platform. The M1 is so good and each time I’ve given it something a little better it has the revolving power to appreciate it and thank you for it by reflecting in increased SQ. 

Jwm 12-25-2017
I’m using cat 6 from my pc to the router which acts as a local network as it is not attached to the internet. Cat 6 then goes from the router to the internal M5 board of the bricasti. Which then converts and reclocks the signal via I2S to the chip. I call the router wireless because it allows me to use j river off the pc by j remote to my I pad.

OK. So then the network switch suggestion is applicable. And I see no reason why inserting it into the wired path between the router and the DAC would have any impact on what you presently do wirelessly, or on anything else other than possibly providing a sonic benefit.

Fsmithjack 12-26-2017
It’s not about cleaning the signal it’s about sending one less dirty.

it is not less dirty because it was cleaned more but a bit cleaner to start with hence has a lower noise floor. Kind of like 2 clean cars. One was dirty and washed and the other never really got dirty but both are clean.

This is a good analogy. As I said earlier, the signal that would be sent by the switch to the DAC is generated by the switch, and while it would have the same data content as the signal sent by the router, the waveform and noise characteristics of the signals sent by the two devices will differ.

BTW, the GS108 switch that was suggested comes in both "managed" and "unmanaged" versions. As Joe indicated earlier, IMO the less complex and less expensive unmanaged version would be the way to go. Also, that device provides 8 ports, and you only need two, so I would suggest the 5 port GS105 rather than the GS108. You would simply connect it and its power supply (or an upgraded power supply), and be good to go.

Regards,
-- Al