Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Quote

UpTone Audio is proud to announce availability of EtherREGEN. In development for nearly two years, this unique and highly advanced Ethernet switch will exceed expectations—producing surprising audible sonic improvements in fine music systems.

The above quote is from the Uptone web site and in the email that I received.  At USD640 plus shipping, this is not a run of mill network switch.  Is this a game changer or hype?  Has anyone here been following the development or better still been involved in the beta testing?   Have always considered improving the Ethernet as secondary  compared with improving components and interconnects, but maybe I need to re-consider?

 

Below are useful links that came in the Uptone email:

 

You can read all about it at https://uptoneaudio.com/products/etherregen

 

Other details about the launch are in the first post of a new thread in our sponsored forum at AudiophileStyle.com:

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/57340-etherregen-alert-web-page-up-orders-accepted-starting-900-pst-tuesday-oct-8th/

 

Discussion about the EtherREGEN, its design, usage, and general user excitement has been going on for 18 months at this thread:

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/38968-etherregen-we-are-in-final-beta-about-to-enter-production/

  • Like 1
Guest rmpfyf
Posted

Should work just fine. A few details are missing but nothing anything but a networking freak would notice.

 

Been following development but I'm too cheap to drop a grand on a router.

 

Won't need additional mega dollar power supplies, external isolators or uber cables on the downstream end.

 

A few people will be a little dark about the output not being Gigabit but for most users it's a practical non-issue.

Posted

I'd really be happy to consider a product like this, but for the fact that my playback chain does not live stream the audio to my renderer.  If I was using Airplay which is a billion packets without accurate clocks then I'd be sure ensure Ethernet was clean.  I'm using Airplay for podcasts and workout music from Apple Music, so very casual use.  For my critical listening I have Audirvana on Mac stream to a Pi.  It does this by decoding the music file to WAV and sending the WAV file to the Pi, from which it plays that from it's hardware.  

 

Are they suggesting that this product improves realtime streaming by clocking the signal perfectly to minimise noise issues?  Until this product has come along I too was worried about Ethernet opening up my streamer to interference and decided WiFi was best with kernal tweak to ensure power management was off to avoid it jumping up and down in cycles.  

  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

Scepticism intensifies. I call hype.

Initially I thought so too!  But with an engineer like John Swenson involved, I am not so sure...

  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Snoopy8 said:

Initially I thought so too!  But with an engineer like John Swenson involved, I am not so sure...

Parts of it make sense but the rest is pointless.

Posted

hype, I would rather invest into properly isolated (in case of cable connection) and buffered streamer followed by Dac than to this

Guest rmpfyf
Posted

So much misplaced snobbery here.

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, rmpfyf said:

So much misplaced snobbery here.

You're welcome, but we were asked for our opinion.

Edited by Ittaku
  • Like 1
Guest rmpfyf
Posted
58 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

You're welcome, but we were asked for our opinion.

 

It takes around USD$200 bill of materials cost to build a decent isolator/reclocker/etc for your DAC. 

 

What's the MSRP on your MSB Reference DAC again? 

 

Hell of a vantage point.

Posted
2 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

So much misplaced snobbery here.

not sure which snobbery you're talking about....

no matter how good the router would be or how much it cost it won't fix "if streamer's shite", that's the point where's network stream clocked, buffered and real time fed to the DAC, that's the point in the audio chain where's important part happening (or anywhere between streamer and DAC if someone's adding additional converters/cleaners) so fix the streamer and you don't have to pay for expensive AP routers or any other upstream items, it's hype, period...and if anyone's willing to spend grand on miracle routers with advertised improvements I'm pretty sure that same person can spend less or same amount on streamer immune to upstream quality (if there's even need to make it immune)

so far based on measurements I've seen about previous regen magic cleaners I don't expect this will be any better than just aid for problem which doesn't exist...but who knows...

 

Guest rmpfyf
Posted
2 hours ago, kukynas said:

not sure which snobbery you're talking about....

no matter how good the router would be or how much it cost it won't fix "if streamer's shite", that's the point where's network stream clocked, buffered and real time fed to the DAC, that's the point in the audio chain where's important part happening (or anywhere between streamer and DAC if someone's adding additional converters/cleaners) so fix the streamer and you don't have to pay for expensive AP routers or any other upstream items, it's hype, period...and if anyone's willing to spend grand on miracle routers with advertised improvements I'm pretty sure that same person can spend less or same amount on streamer immune to upstream quality (if there's even need to make it immune)

so far based on measurements I've seen about previous regen magic cleaners I don't expect this will be any better than just aid for problem which doesn't exist...but who knows...

 

 

No s***.

 

The parts required to make a decent reclocker cost about as much as the cost of parts for one of these items, they're just harder to implement (best done on the DAC). Most people simply can't do this for a variety of reasons, some practical, and so we're left with patching things up with band aid solutions bit by bit. Which is essentially Uptone Audio's market.

 

Would I buy it? No, but if suggest someone does instead of a SoTM whatever if they're so inclined. It's at least well engineered.

 

For an industry obsessed with band aids this isn't a bad one, particularly considering what decent Ethernet isolation costs. 

 

Usual test applies - pull the cable and play from RAM if possible - if it sounds different, go your hardest.

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

 

It takes around USD$200 bill of materials cost to build a decent isolator/reclocker/etc for your DAC. 

 

What's the MSRP on your MSB Reference DAC again? 

 

Hell of a vantage point.

How does a network isolator "low jitter clock" for the network packets affect the jitter of the DAC again? I said parts of it made sense. Some of the stuff in there is pointless though, and just ported across ideas from audio equipment.

Edited by Ittaku
Guest rmpfyf
Posted
1 hour ago, Ittaku said:

How does a network isolator "low jitter clock" for the network packets affect the jitter of the DAC again? I said parts of it made sense. Some of the stuff in there is pointless though, and just ported across ideas from audio equipment.

 

Of course it doesn't do so directly; it can affect OS jitter.

 

If streaming without serious buffering anywhere there's an indirect effect on the DAC. Not all rigs are so compromised, it depends on the system.

 

OS jitter is quite a real/measurable thing however. Sensitivity on Ethernet is easy for most to test - drop the interface speed and have a listen (and/or up the frame size where supported).

Posted
48 minutes ago, rmpfyf said:

Of course it doesn't do so directly; it can affect OS jitter.

 

If streaming without serious buffering anywhere there's an indirect effect on the DAC. Not all rigs are so compromised, it depends on the system.

 

OS jitter is quite a real/measurable thing however. Sensitivity on Ethernet is easy for most to test - drop the interface speed and have a listen (and/or up the frame size where supported).

You see problems where I don't. We seem to have a recurring discrepancy of opinion. Respectfully disagree, but we'll have to leave it at that.

Posted
11 hours ago, Ittaku said:

You're welcome, but we were asked for our opinion.

Yes, but how you like to give it!

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, was_a said:

Yes, but how you like to give it!

Yep, any opportunity when that's what is asked, but I won't go crashing glowing reviews from people who don't ask.

Posted (edited)
On 07/10/2019 at 12:37 PM, captaineos said:

I'd really be happy to consider a product like this, but for the fact that my playback chain does not live stream the audio to my renderer.  If I was using Airplay which is a billion packets without accurate clocks then I'd be sure ensure Ethernet was clean.  I'm using Airplay for podcasts and workout music from Apple Music, so very casual use.  For my critical listening I have Audirvana on Mac stream to a Pi.  It does this by decoding the music file to WAV and sending the WAV file to the Pi, from which it plays that from it's hardware.  

 

Are they suggesting that this product improves realtime streaming by clocking the signal perfectly to minimise noise issues?  Until this product has come along I too was worried about Ethernet opening up my streamer to interference and decided WiFi was best with kernal tweak to ensure power management was off to avoid it jumping up and down in cycles.  

 

I'm with you regarding Audirvana. For critical listening it's Audirvana Plus on an optimised Windows 10, networking disabled. (I drag WAV files to a secondary solid-state drive and hey presto). For sound quality I prefer this over other computer playback software like HQPlayer and JRiver, or internet/streaming options like JPlay, Hysolid and Roon. 

 

As an experiment I've been (cheaply) tweaking my ethernet with a linear supply to router, and inserting a CAT8 cable. For streaming audio this certainly improved the sound, as did a couple of ethernet/isolation filters I tried.

 

If I was sold on streaming or dependant on it for content, I'd definitely consider this new product from UpTone.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by was_a
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, rmpfyf said:

Of course it doesn't do so directly; it can affect OS jitter.

 

51 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

OS jitter is quite a real/measurable thing however. Sensitivity on Ethernet is easy for most to test - drop the interface speed and have a listen (and/or up the frame size where supported).

 

I don't understand how this gets to the DAC.  Let's say the DAC is plugged into the computer suffering OS jitter.  Surely the design of the DAC includes a buffer, since the designer knows it is being delivered it's data from such a source.  As the data is clocked through the DAC, that's where any jitter must occur if it is to be heard.  Is that the problem?  The clock I mean?  Is it not asynchronous, relying on the buffer for isolation?

Edited by aussievintage
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I've found with ethernet (or wifi adapter) that the biggest issue is noise being passed down the chain, causing loss of clarity and other digital 'artefacts'. Regarding UpTone's jitter-reduction circuit in this latest product, surely it's a practical solution for setups with no existing re-clockers / interfaces. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by was_a
Posted

Until the first batch is shipped in November and listening comparisons are posted, it is a moot point debating the merits of the technology and how it impacts the sound.  Only very few have heard it and no one has posted anything other than the CEO who is of course biased (post #1277 in development thread). The development thread is very long but offers interesting insight with debate and scepticism.

 

Having John Swenson design it suggests that it is more hype.  And if it stacks up, could make redundant a lot of stupidly expensive external clocking, Ethernet cabling and modded switches. I am keeping an open mind and looking forward to the listening feedback especially from sceptics and those who do not hear much difference. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Posted

I think they would actually improve product acceptance if they would refrain from stuff like this

 

Quote

Going from port-to-port on the ‘A’ side is better than any other switch out there, but crossing our Active Differential Isolation Moat (“ADIM”) brings a whole new world of Ethernet performance for audio.

Active Differential Isolation Moat - really?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

I don't understand how this gets to the DAC.  Let's say the DAC is plugged into the computer suffering OS jitter.  Surely the design of the DAC includes a buffer, since the designer knows it is being delivered it's data from such a source.  As the data is clocked through the DAC, that's where any jitter must occur if it is to be heard.  Is that the problem?  The clock I mean?  Is it not asynchronous, relying on the buffer for isolation?

You mistakenly quoted that as coming from me, but I agree with you.

Posted

I get the galvanic isolation and reducing leakage current on the EtherRegen but not what the re-clocking does.  John Swenson (sorry to mention him again like a fanboi !) posted this on 1 Apr 2018 (ironically!) Post #17 on development thread

Quote

As Alex mentioned I am just finishing up a complex test system for actually doing an end to end clock analysis (digital data stream to DAC output) in order to really nail down what is going on in our systems. There are several hypothesis for what is going on, and several possible schemes for suppressing these, I will be testing all of these out, and the one that works the best will go in the switch.

 

This is not JUST a development project, there is a lot of fundamental research going on. I have been doing a bunch already, enough to know that SOMETHING is going on, but not enough detail to figure out what it really is. That's what this stage of testing is all about.

He is supposed to be publishing a white paper soon.  And in Post #70

Quote

The other is phase noise of clocks in the network. Again consumer LAN equipment does not usually have clocks with very low phase noise. These clocks are used to clock out the data going over the wire, so they too have the same phase noise as the internal clock. When this data stream goes into a receiver it generates noise on the ground plane which in turns generates extra phase noise on any clock connected to the ground plane. This can cascade down through connected devices into the DAC, again increasing the phase noise of the local clock.

 

Leakage and phase noise can interact, the leakage on the Ethernet cable, can go through the motherboard on a renderer, adding phase to the clock that winds up driving a USB port which winds on on the ground plane of the DAC etc. The exact details of how this works is what I'm trying to work out now.

 

Unusual to have the designer openly stating what he is doing and the research that he has been undertaking.  I cannot claim I understand everything said, so cannot debate the technical merits.  But it will be interesting to see how this translates into real world listening and its impact on sound quality.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top