Thread: Ethernet switch box

Originally Posted by TheOctopus

Same here. I just enjoy music. The question of what power cord or interconnect I should get next is simply a non issue for me these days. I am not using a lamp cord or a zip cord by any means but chasing the latest and the greatest just doesn't turn me on like it used to... Having an electronics background myself, it is also enough to know what a power supply does as well as what shielding does to a power cord and how it all ties in with UL listing and fire safety... etc... Let's just say I'd rather hear what John Coltrane was trying to say through his sax than what the latest and greatest power cord of the month is.

Very true, ya ever noticed that ever year they come out with the latest and greatest, and for the product to be so much better than the one they came with the year before and so for and so for and along with it comes the increase of cost. Good Marketing never fails.

Any way sorry to side track this thread.

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

You'll get a straight answer from John Swenson.

Reduction of jitter (including threshold jitter) and timing errors from phase noise as well as ground plane noise is audible. The benefits of adding a better swtich are just as audible as adding a better clock, and I don't see folks stating that adding a better clock brings doesn't bring an audible improvement. I'm sure some folks here have those nice Cybershaft and Esoteric clocks.

John Swenson has the test equipment. He built it, so he knows how to use it. He used to design Ethernet chips, PHYs, flip-flops, switch components, power supplies for the better part of 40 years at LSI, Inc, Broadcom, Cisco. It's accurate to say he know more about this any of us.

So I will get a straight answer from someone who is selling audiophile switches? What is your business relationship with Swenson? Are you taking pictures of his gear for free?

There are no absolutes in this hobby. Too many variables come into play with the workings of a persons brain possibly the most significant.

Maybe the definition of an Audiophile should be someone who feels the need to tell others that they are/aren't hearing.

Originally Posted by still-one

There are no absolutes in this hobby. Too many variables come into play with the workings of a persons brain possibly the most significant.

Maybe the definition of an Audiophile should be someone who feels the need to tell others that they are/aren't hearing.

And you have to separate out regular audiophiles from Brand Ambassadors, shills, and gorilla marketers.

Originally Posted by u-sound

some happy people do things because they like to do it

That’s one explanation.

I post what I experience, if it helps someone, great.

Somewhat frustrating to read a lot of the negative banter that turns into personal insults, especially coming from the sidelines from arm chair quarter backs not on the field playing the game.

Stillone is right IMO as many other points, there are lot of variables down to the listener and either something works or it doesn’t.

Numbers do cast awareness, but nothing to live or die by and certainly not worth a lick of emotion.

If it sounds good is all that matters, and I hope no one is hesitant doing what they feel is right cause of this type of BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The difficulty in separating useful opinions from trolls and shills is well known by now, and is not a bad reason to be skeptical. Look at Amazon's half-hearted vetting of the product reviews on their site; the well meaning and perhaps necessary attempts at weeding out those posts leads invariably to cries of censorship. Even before the Internet became ubiquitous, similar problems in our little world of high-end audio applied to publications and reviewers; accommodation pricing, pay-to-play reviewing, even reviewing one's own product and hiding the fact all eventually became well-known. If you don't know much (or anything) about a poster it may be hard to take his/her posts seriously if they are significantly at odds with one's own experience.

Posters sharing their experience and opinions, clearly expressed as such is one thing; telling others you are right and they are wrong, and/or couching your opinions as proven facts is another matter entirely. If I have spent any time with a given person listening to the same system at the same time and sharing opinions I have a good idea of what weight I personally should give to that person's opinions; otherwise it's a bit of a crapshoot. That's one thing I like about audio shows, the chance to actually listen simultaneously and share impressions with reviewers and other more mundane audiophiles; that works even if the rooms and equipment are not at their best.

Originally Posted by UltraFast69

I post what I experience, if it helps someone, great.

Somewhat frustrating to read a lot of the negative banter that turns into personal insults, especially coming from the sidelines from arm chair quarter backs not on the field playing the game.

Stillone is right IMO as many other points, there are lot of variables down to the listener and either something works or it doesn’t.

Numbers do cast awareness, but nothing to live or die by and certainly not worth a lick of emotion.

If it sounds good is all that matters, and I hope no one is hesitant doing what they feel is right cause of this type of BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

At the end of the day, we all post our experiences. And when you snipe about armchair quarterbacks not on the field playing the game, I guess you need to identify the game you are playing. I have a rack dedicated to my digital gear. I have my own network in my dedicated stereo room. I paid an electrician to run Cat 8 cable from the room downstairs where the router/modem is located to my stereo room upstairs. My Netgear router is plugged into the wall jack my electrician installed next to my digital rack. Both my Roon Nucleus+ and my DSJ are plugged into the Netgear router. I have subscriptions to both Tidal and Quobuz.

I’m happy with the performance of my digital rig. I have zero noise issues. I don’t suffer from dropouts when streaming. So, I’m in the game, but some of us are playing different games. I’m a believer in keeping your network as simple as possible so that’s the digital game I’m playing.

Originally Posted by Devg

If your digital rig is connected to the network, it actually helps tremendously optimizing it, unless you have a component designed from ground up to have no effect on Ethernet.

If you are primarily streaming with your digital rig, it has to be connected to the network. What does “have no effect on Ethernet” mean?

Originally Posted by Devg

It means the device is devoid of all hash/gremlins that comes as part of network connectivity - both physical (ground noise, etc) and from network protocol perspective. Ethernet phys are transformer coupled but somehow still noise gets in, so how do you deal with this at the physical aspect - one solution is to use fiber. The other comes from packet processing aspect that happens inside the device. A simple network event causes a ton of churn within which is very detrimental to sound. Segregating and isolating network at different levels (routers, switches, protocol configuration, playback software, OS optimization, coalescing, core isolation, etc) is the key to get good digital audio for streaming devices, more so than an expensive use of USB cable.

What a great argument for not streaming

Originally Posted by mep

At the end of the day, we all post our experiences. And when you snipe about armchair quarterbacks not on the field playing the game, I guess you need to identify the game you are playing. I have a rack dedicated to my digital gear. I have my own network in my dedicated stereo room. I paid an electrician to run Cat 8 cable from the room downstairs where the router/modem is located to my stereo room upstairs. My Netgear router is plugged into the wall jack my electrician installed next to my digital rack. Both my Roon Nucleus+ and my DSJ are plugged into the Netgear router. I have subscriptions to both Tidal and Quobuz.

I’m happy with the performance of my digital rig. I have zero noise issues. I don’t suffer from dropouts when streaming. So, I’m in the game, but some of us are playing different games. I’m a believer in keeping your network as simple as possible so that’s the digital game I’m playing.

Your not getting everything out of your digital you could be. Your digital backbone is not as good as it could be. Its solid. It sounds well done. But is could be better.

Puma Cat, nice article. I did not know that was you. I read it today.

I just read the Audio Science review Mike posted the link too. An interesting point was made by the author and something I have found testing switches. The buffer is so large when you go and swap cables to change the switch, you are still listening to the original data from the first switch. The only way to really hear what a switch is doing is to stop the music. Close it out to kill the buffer which may be the entire song. Change the cables, then reload the song.

I have heard Ultrafast system many times. I have also come to appreciate UltraF has a golden ear. He catches subtle detail others miss. He was at my house one day with some toys to show me, and he was much quicker at identifying the changes than I was. But I did hear what he heard and in the end changed out a bunch of footers to a large benefit in my setup. What I am saying is, he is spot on when he tells you the EtherREGEN works. But it does not stop at a stock EtherREGEN. Your still leaving performance on the table. The Power Supply matters. The footers under the unit matter. The base the unit sits on matters. The cables tying the network together matter. It all matters if you want to get the best sound. But the EtherREGEN is a good start as a stand alone product. It will take away digital artifacts that make you cringe at times with digital.

Something to remember about digital, the sum whole of great digital is made up of many small applications that support each other.

Originally Posted by Kingrex

Puma Cat, nice article. I did not know that was you. I read it today.

I just read the Audio Science review Mike posted the link too. An interesting point was made by the author and something I have found testing switches. The buffer is so large when you go and swap cables to change the switch, you are still listening to the original data from the first switch. The only way to really hear what a switch is doing is to stop the music. Close it out to kill the buffer which may be the entire song. Change the cables, then reload the song.

I have heard Ultrafast system many times. I have also come to appreciate UltraF has a golden ear. He catches subtle detail others miss. He was at my house one day with some toys to show me, and he was much quicker at identifying the changes than I was. But I did hear what he heard and in the end changed out a bunch of footers to a large benefit in my setup. What I am saying is, he is spot on when he tells you the EtherREGEN works. But it does not stop at a stock EtherREGEN. Your still leaving performance on the table. The Power Supply matters. The footers under the unit matter. The base the unit sits on matters. The cables tying the network together matter. It all matters if you want to get the best sound. But the EtherREGEN is a good start as a stand alone product. It will take away digital artifacts that make you cringe at times with digital.

Something to remember about digital, the sum whole of great digital is made up of many small applications that support each other.

It s all in the ears of the listener.

Originally Posted by Devg

Now you know why many times you hear arguments like "my CD player sounds better than my streaming setup"

More than that, you are assuming that the streaming services are taking the same care at their end as you are at yours. IME, not likely.

Originally Posted by Devg

It means the device is devoid of all hash/gremlins that comes as part of network connectivity - both physical (ground noise, etc) and from network protocol perspective. Ethernet phys are transformer coupled but somehow still noise gets in, so how do you deal with this at the physical aspect - one solution is to use fiber. The other comes from packet processing aspect that happens inside the device. A simple network event causes a ton of churn within which is very detrimental to sound. Segregating and isolating network at different levels (routers, switches, protocol configuration, playback software, OS optimization, coalescing, core isolation, etc) is the key to get good digital audio for streaming devices, more so than an expensive use of USB cable.

I don't feel the need to add digital dingleberries to my network to chase after the ghosts of "hash/gremlins" that I can't hear. Funny how people can convince other people they need to spend money on solutions in search of problems. This is another 'don't believe your ears' fairy tale that claims that even though your system is dead drop quiet, you have hash and gremlins running amok in your network and they just robbed the digital goodness store at 5th and Market St.

Originally Posted by rbbert

More than that, you are assuming that the streaming services are taking the same care at their end as you are at yours. IME, not likely.

How many audiophile switches do you think Tidal and Quobuz are running?

Originally Posted by Kingrex

Your not getting everything out of your digital you could be. Your digital backbone is not as good as it could be. Its solid. It sounds well done. But is could be better.

That's hilarious, especially coming from you.

You guys have made a good point for not streaming, although many users enjoy streaming. Therefore to each his/her own! I do not stream because I am so much worried about my network, etc. I figure whatever can happen to the signal has long since happened to it before it actually reaches my house. I don't stream because I prefer to have the digital part of my music library stored local on my server. I also do not want my streaming to take up bandwidth from other devices and users on my network, my wife, etc.

Also, I see people making an argument for optical versus ethernet. Ok, I see what you are trying to say except one major aspect. This is converting the signal to optical to be transmitted as light streams and then converting it back to electronic impulses (if I termed it correctly?) on the receiving end. I personal believe that any possible gains transmitting the data may be lost in the converting stages, unless you are sending your signal great distances (in your house, no matter how big your home is you are not sending it great distances).

Originally Posted by Randy Myers

You guys have made a good point for not streaming, although many users enjoy streaming. Therefore to each his/her own! I do not stream because I am so much worried about my network, etc. I figure whatever can happen to the signal has long since happened to it before it actually reaches my house. I don't stream because I prefer to have the digital part of my music library stored local on my server. I also do not want my streaming to take up bandwidth from other devices and users on my network, my wife, etc.

Also, I see people making an argument for optical versus ethernet. Ok, I see what you are trying to say except one major aspect. This is converting the signal to optical to be transmitted as light streams and then converting it back to electronic impulses (if I termed it correctly?) on the receiving end. I personal believe that any possible gains transmitting the data may be lost in the converting stages, unless you are sending your signal great distances (in your house, no matter home big it is you are not sending it great distances).

And we haven't even mentioned hot rod clocks. Let's face it, there are audiophiles who love adding as many devices as they can to their streaming network and that doesn't include power cords designed for digital gear because digital gear needs different power from your wall outlets, linear power supplies to replace all wall warts, and very expensive audiophile grade Ethernet cables. It's a deep digital rabbit hole that some audiophiles delight in exploring. Nothing wrong with that of course, that's what makes this hobby interesting. And if your digital really is improved sonically because of all the digital dingleberries you added to your digital rig, that's icing on the digital cake.

I'm not sure replacing a SMPS with a LPS qualifies as adding a dingleberry. I can't speak for all applications, but replacing the the SMPS in my Oppo 205 with a dedicated LPS (and not a particularly expensive one, much cheaper than most audiophile AC cords) resulted in a substantial improvement, easily noticeable because I have 2 and was able to directly compare the LPS to the SMPS. Quickly and reliably audible with blind A/B testing.

People building their own music servers also notice this phenomenon (as do manufacturers). Whether it applies to every component using a SMPS I couldn't say.

Originally Posted by rbbert

I'm not sure replacing a SMPS with a LPS qualifies as adding a dingleberry. I can't speak for all applications, but replacing the the SMPS in my Oppo 205 with a dedicated LPS (and not a particularly expensive one, much cheaper than most audiophile AC cords) resulted in a substantial improvement, easily noticeable because I have 2 and was able to directly compare the LPS to the SMPS. Quickly and reliably audible with blind A/B testing.

People building their own music servers also notice this phenomenon (as do manufacturers). Whether it applies to every component using a SMPS I couldn't say.

I think what MEP means, is the horde of USB, Ethernet switch boxes, fancy cables, network isolators JItter fixers for these two items etc.. not SMPS or LPS. But ! of course I could be wrong.

I do know the Berkley Alpha USB device made a different when I used it. BUt its my ears.

Originally Posted by CPP

I think what MEP means, is the horde of USB, Ethernet switch boxes, fancy cables and idolators for these two items etc.. not SMPS or LPS.

Perhaps, but he specifically mentioned replacing SMPS with LPS (or not, actually)

Originally Posted by rbbert

Perhaps, but he specifically mentioned replacing SMPS with LPS (or not, actually)

What he said was this " that doesn't include power cords designed for digital gear because digital gear needs different power from your wall outlets, linear power supplies to replace all wall warts, "

I do think he was referring to replacing SMPS with LPS as unnecessary, and I was responding with my opinion and experience for only a couple of specific and limited situations

I would then postulate that no matter what one does at the receiving end to optimize the signal, streaming will never equal the quality of the same recording not streamed (i.e., played from CD, hi-res file, or whatever the source of the stream). As you say, many have reported this to be their experience.

I don’t think it is at all analogous to what happens with AC power.

Originally Posted by Devg

Isn't last couple of stretches of the marathon that matter in both the cases ?

Only when the wallet is concerned

Originally Posted by Devg

Streaming can equal or even exceed a good CD player. Just buy the Taiko extreme and couple of PF modded Melco switches
Why not ? Isn't last couple of stretches of the marathon that matter in both the cases ?

To the latter, one is in the audio signal line, one isn’t. That doesn’t necessarily mean each isn’t important, only that they aren’t very analogous.

To the first, $40-$50k to “beat” how expensive a CD player? And how about a 24/192 or DSD128 file through a “modest” DAC (Lampi, MSB, whatever)?

Originally Posted by Devg

Unfortunately what you personally believe is incorrect. Nothing is lost in converting stages - they are extremely fast and handled at line rates. One thing that can possibly effect the SQ is the transmitted noise from the convertor chip (they are indeed high speed intefaces) but that can be handled with good design, like eR or Sonore Optical Module.

And here I was starting to like you ... as I said, I do not have knowledge of the convertors but formed an opinion (that could be and appears to be incorrect) from many years working in the computer field.

I still stick with my opinion that the advantage will be minimal in a home network.

Originally Posted by Devg

...See, I am not buying any of those servers. I am a poor audiophile on a DIY route One thing to note, the bit-rates 24/192 or 384 or 768 or 1536 or DSD64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048 has nothing to do with the server if you are playing them in native resolution and you have sufficient network bandwidth when streaming. Once you start upsampling in the software, its a different ball game altogether.

You were the one who mentioned the Taiko with Melco switches And you mentioned CD player, I was merely throwing out some other formats to compare.
Don't you think playing a home storage file with whatever network one has is likely to sound better than streaming it from Tidal or Qobuz?

Originally Posted by Devg

The advantage is not about network bandwidth or anything remotely to do with networking. With copper RJ45 or Fiber, you basically get exactly the same speed, the same latency and same everything related to networking. The advantage is mainly to eliminate the ground noise - now if you don't have any of the ground noise, then you are really golden and you can sit back, relax and enjoy the music

fyi, I am honestly trying to explain some of the stuff which I think many has misconception. I am not trying to sell anybody anything or recommend one product or the other if you read back all my posts.

Yea, I know. Just having a little fun with ya.

Originally Posted by infonut

Does anyone have any experience with this switch or have compared it to the EtherREGEN:

M12 Gold Switch | davidmichaelaudio

$4800 for a network switch. Give me a break.