dbastin Posted November 16, 2021 Author Posted November 16, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, frednork said: No, the cards hang off an m2 to pcie adapter cable and as mentioned are powered separately. Oh, could be even less audiophile than thunderbolt! Or perhaps you found a good (ish) one. Wifi into my Devialet Pro is the best I've had by a margin of a few thousand $. I feel it is better than Auralic Aries G1 even powered via US$6k power cord. Fiber depends on the hardware, and where it is in the chain. There is a myriad of SFP and cable combos, but very rarely does an endpoint have fibre input. In my view, it is best to isolate from the network noise, and if your endpoint is RJ45 only, then use then use wired connection there. However it might be relative to the noise floor of your system, which I gather comes in mostly through mains power. Edited November 16, 2021 by dbastin
frednork Posted November 16, 2021 Posted November 16, 2021 8 hours ago, dbastin said: Oh, could be even less audiophile than thunderbolt! interested in why you would think it would be worse? I ended up using the ones from ADT as recommended by Audiophile style's Chris Connaker in the latest CAPS server thread. 9 hours ago, dbastin said: There is a myriad of SFP and cable combos, but very rarely does an endpoint have fibre input. Yes, if it were clearly superior in every situation one would think it would be ubiquitous. I note the Taiko has one. It is interesting what they say about it. sorry its long but interesting I think. A domestic switch will simply replicate all data on it’s input to all it’s outputs, a smart switch provides you with a degree of control over this, so you can segment your network, reducing network traffic on specific links. Again this is advanced networking, none of the “audiophile” switches support this. Now before you think “gotta have”, smart switches apply processing to the data stream, investigate certain parts of all data packets passing through, use more power, and have a noise signature. So there are pluses and minuses to using this in the first place. Network utilisation and the amount of active devices in your network are going to be determining factors if this can net out positive or not. 100Mbit networking uses 2 differential data pairs, 1Gbit networking uses 4. Data is transported as a modulated voltage over these lines. Modulating voltage introduces certain types of noise. In a switch the ports are galvanically decoupled by means of a differential transformer of which the center tap is connected to ground, usually through a simple filter network. One of the functions of this is to break “ground current paths”. Moving to fiber, we have optical links, SFP modules convert electrical signals to light pulses and vice versa. So arguable there is no real benefit to reducing network activity induced noise, in fact there is additional activity inside your appliances from this conversion process. A SFP module can easily consume 1 to 1.5 watts of power, which does not seem like much, but at this level, it is a lot. On the plus side there is no path for ground currents or electrical noise, whatever the source, travelling your fiber links. There are many types and makes of SFP modules, obvious differences can be found in power consumption efficiency, robustness, error correction, quality of optical receivers/transceivers etc. SFP+ (10G) modules can apply a higher degree of error correction, some even have built in “reclocking or jitter reduction” and yes this draws more power, so positives and negatives. Industrial versions are built to operate in harsh environments, like abnormal temperatures, heavy vibration environments, or in strong RFI/EMI polluted areas. What you can get buying industrial grade is better component quality and tolerance, higher selection grades, more robust PCB mounting and/or layout, better error correction algorithms, better filtering and most of the time lower power consumption. The downside is hefty price tags. We do have a few here. Your internet router performs quite a bit of processing, it almost always performs something called NAT (Network Address Translation) meaning it forwards traffic from the internet to a different Ip range which you use inside your home. There is both a security and a functional aspect to it as without it each of your devices would require an unique IP address on the whole world wide web, and there is a limit to addresses available, that is why we are for example moving from the IPv4 protocol to IPv6 which has a vastly higher number of IP addresses available. A security aspect is your device cannot directly be accessed from any other device in the world. The router usually also provides DHCP services (assigns an unique address to each device on your local network), can provide DNS caching and often runs firewall software. It also often provides Wi-Fi services. It can be quite a busy device. By now it must be clear that this is a very complex system with a lot of variables in play. Every network is likely to be unique. Different routers, different switches, different devices using it, different traffic patterns, it is unlikely that there are 2 exact identically performing network setups anywhere in the world at any given time. Now how does all of this influence playback quality of the Extreme? Well it does, no way around it. So what we have done is running a whole lot of different network setups and combinations to identify the largest disturbances to sound quality. You can take measures to minimize their influence and get repeatable results up to a degree. The copper network port of the Extreme will provide you with good and repeatable sound quality in virtually all environments. It will sound largely similar in all environments, even in the presence of heavy RFI/EMI pollution. The fiber network port of the Extreme provides a somewhat different perspective, it will not very significantly impact the overall sound quality or voicing. The plus side is a certain degree of “isolation”. The down side is additional processing and a slightly higher power consumption. It tends to net out positive with for example blacker backgrounds, improved clarity and more focus without impacting voicing. The downside of the increased focus is “sharper edges” to images, and some SFP modules can introduce a degree of mechanical quality to the sound, the reclocking SFP+ modules being about the worst at that. So we have recommendations we make, based on repeatable results in different environments, the recommended SFP modules and FMC are based on that. There are combinations which give an impression of higher resolution but it’s important to note increased noise is often perceived as increased resolution. The fatiguing aspect of this usually goes unnoticed as comparative listening sessions are often of short duration with a few test tracks people skip through quickly to remember enough detail to make a meaningful A/B comparison. It is rarely evaluated long term, being over weeks, listening in different moods/mindsets, at different levels of physical or mental fatigue, at different times of the day with varying levels of power grid pollution, or how do you perceive the difference in the first 30 minutes, and then after a few hours of continuous listening. There are again a lot of variations to evaluating. Therefore our recommendation is to just use copper networking initially, let the Extreme burn in / settle in your environment, so far it has performed to full satisfaction by everybody who has bought one using it this way. Apply basic voicing measures as you would do with any appliance, like powercords, usb cables, footers etc, to adjust it to your taste. Then, if you feel so inclined turn to tweaking your network environment. And don’t take anything for granted there, as your results are not guaranteed to mirror others. It is relatively risk free to jump straight to using fiber, when used with the components we have tested long term, in various environments, but it is really optional. It is a relatively minor investment with value for money gains though. The downside is it has a “manual”, if you power cycle the server you sometimes have to power cycle the FMC too, or pull the copper network cable from it, so it generates a link fault resetting the interface. But that is really quite a minor issue. Now keep in mind, network tweaking and audiophile networking products are relatively new, surely there are gains to be made there. But do be aware of all aspects of performance. Wireless networking does negatively impact your hifi system. It is airborne high frequency noise. This is partially why we use a hole pattern in stead of slots for ventilation, it shields from high frequency noise. This is a 2 way street, the Extreme is pretty well shielded from outside rfi noise, though not immune, almost nothing is unless being explicitly designed to be that. But it is much more immune to RFI then for example an Intel NUC. Now take a good look at chassis openings in your other hifi equipment and consider cabling, rarely completely shielded, your in wall power wiring etc. Wireless networking transmissions are going to find their way into your system. It’s just part of living in this age and time. If you can accept it’s part of our lives now, and it provides services you are more than happy to use, why object to using something like a wireless extender, or even just use wireless networking as your main infrastructure? Especially when you have even stronger noise sources to deal with, which can make this a really minor issue. If you’re asking what in our experience least impacts sound quality in networking, wireless is going to be at the bottom of our list. Not just by how it works, not even because the networking stack is more complex on the software side, as that does not come into play using extenders, however we completely removed all wireless support from the Operating System on the Extreme on purpose. But just because it sprays the system with RF. Unfortunately we cannot make foolproof recommendations here as the network setups / environments are different everywhere. Similar to a powercord, interconnect or a footer not having the same effect in every system. Some examples: -Most people do prefer using the fiber network input of the Extreme with the Startech components recommended by us. But if you use a 2 meter fiber optic cable to a SMPS powered FMC which plugs into the same circuit, you will likely not be happy. If you have a 10 meter or longer fiber optic cable and the SMPS powered FMC is spaced well away from your system, most people like it. This is an area where powering the FMC with a Linear Power Supply can help. But Linear Powersupplies have their signature too. We have customer feedback where they replaced that SMPS with a LPS and are not happy with the result. -The much discussed SOTM switch. We have customers loving them, we also have customers who bought and stacked 2 of them and tell me it sounds different but they do not enjoy what it does. -Then we have customers who bought an audiophile copper network cable and they don’t like fiber at all. The bottom line is, networking is tweakable, it makes a difference, but there is no universally applicable recommendation. The only consistent factor is the differences network tweaking makes is less influential with the Extreme compared to other less purposely built machines. We do consider all options as “tweaks”. We have not heard any networking setup make a bigger difference than a high quality USB cable, nor good anti vibration measures, when applied to the Extreme. This does not imply USB cables or anti vibration measures render networking tweaks invalid. We are only mentioning this to put some perspective to this, and we do take pride in the fact that we have managed to reduce networking influence on performance. We have tested several cards and SFP+ modules with varying degrees of success. One of the issues is the better sounding SFP+ modules do not work with the better sounding network cards, or they don’t work with the QSW-308. Copper DAC (Direct Attach Cables) are promising performers but the passive ones only work up to 7 meters, active up to 15 meters. I But then there are specific bits of equipment that have been reported to be excellent using wifi which have had the wifi section designed for audio from the ground up it seems as in your experience and the Auralic G2. I suspect the execution is what really matters as they all transmit data perfectly well. The other thing I would say is that I am not comparing SFP to a normal integrated eth port but to a dedicated low noise Ethernet card such as the JCAT XE which may perform some of the same function and may be why I am not perceiving a benefit with fibre. That is not to say I have not noticed an improvement with fiber previously but just not in the current config. 1
dbastin Posted November 17, 2021 Author Posted November 17, 2021 2 hours ago, frednork said: interested in why you would think it would be worse? I ended up using the ones from ADT as recommended by Audiophile style's Chris Connaker in the latest CAPS server thread. Hmm, I have started a diversion from the main topic, however ... it's just a hunch really, given there are 'audiophile' thunderbolt and SATA cables which presumably perform better than the generic 'IT' grade equivalents. My mind opened to this when I first heard the JCAT Signature Gold ethernet cable (which I still use) and got curious about their other cables. Here's some info about JCAT SATA ... https://jcat.eu/audiophile-sata-cable/. Audience does one too. Audioquest has applied some of its usual approaches to thunderbolt ... https://www.audioquest.com/cables/digital-cables/thunderbolt/thunderbolt-coffee Just for other readers, here is some info from the ADT about the M.2 to PCI-e: The extender utilizes the latest materials for EMI shielding with five sole flat cables design. This technique allows each cable to be fully covered by electromagnetic interference shielding with conducting polymer to guard against incoming or outgoing emissions of electromagnetic frequencies, minimize disturbance and degradation on performance, and reduce the weight of the extender. M.2 to PCI-e is so rarely needed by audiophiles I suspect it is not worth developing a better performing design. But many have invested in developing audiophile ethernet cables, hence the purpose of this thread. to hopefully unveil some of the mystery of the range of those options. That info from Taiko is a very interesting read. I have some observations: A domestic switch will simply replicate all data on it’s input to all it’s outputs, a smart switch provides you with a degree of control over this, so you can segment your network, reducing network traffic on specific links. Again this is advanced networking, none of the “audiophile” switches support this. Perhaps that terminology is used in Asia, but as I understand a Hub replicates all data on it’s input to all it’s outputs, a switch sends data to assigned IP addresses (rather than all outputs), and a managed switch provides more control functionality. I gather most audiophile switches are 'switches', not hubs or managed switches. In a switch the ports are galvanically decoupled by means of a differential transformer of which the center tap is connected to ground, usually through a simple filter network. One of the functions of this is to break “ground current paths”. As I understand, the isolation transformers in switches are designed for electrical isolation (safety) rather than designed or intended to block the noise that is problematic to audio. This is probably why Uptone Audio EtherRegen employs its MOAT. There are combinations which give an impression of higher resolution but it’s important to note increased noise is often perceived as increased resolution. I agree, and this is my experience with other types of audio cables etc too. It is hard to recognise the impact of noise, and sometimes nice to have a bit in some systems. It is relatively risk free to jump straight to using fiber, when used with the components we have tested long term, in various environments, but it is really optional. It is a relatively minor investment with value for money gains though. Again, I agree. However I would suggest to use fibre further upstream than the last connection to endpoint which is most sensitive. Wireless networking does negatively impact your hifi system. Generally, I would say "Wireless networking can negatively impact your hifi system, however this may be less than the impact of wired connections." There are many variables here too. The cable to the wifi access point matters, the access point power supply and power cord matters, and it matters to have a separate power supply for the access point. But in my situation, the wifi was still much better than wired even without that attention to detail. I suspect the strengths of JCAT XE card are power regulation and good clock. I have stated elsewhere my current approach is: nbn > fibre > router > wired eth > switch > wired eth > wifi > endpoint Soon trying: nbn > fibre > router > fibre > switch > wired eth > wifi > endpoint The objective is to isolate from the noise of both nbn and the router. My switch is EtherRegen which is presumably very low noise. I have Mikrotik 1Gb SFP and 10Gb SFP+ routers to see if the SFP+ spec for lower jitter is actually better SQ than SFP 1Gb. the SFP+ is also in a metal case whereas the SFP is plastic. I will post my findings in the threads I created about fibre and routers for audio. 2
Stereophilus Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 Very much enjoying the information posted by @dbastin and @frednork. Keep up the good work fellas. @dbastin you have the JCAT signature gold LAN cable? I don’t believe I’ve seen you post a comment about this cable yet? Maybe I am wrong. Having myself recent heard the AIM Shieldio NA7 which has opened my eyes to Ethernet cables considerably, I would value your thoughts on the JCAT. @Assisirecently lent me his ENO Ethernet filter. I’ve been playing around with it, hoping it would do something similar to what the AIM NA7 did. I tried it with and without my Uptone ER, also upstream and downstream from the Renolabs switch. Unfortunately, it’s overall effect seemed very minor, particularly upstream from the Renolabs. But even downstream, being the last link into the streaming input, it mostly seemed to muddy fine detail. As has been mentioned a few times, streaming hifi systems seem to a bit uniquely unpredictable when subjected to Ethernet tweaks. I have no idea why, but the ENO is not for me. Now, I just need to convince @Assisito lend me his Waversa filter
evil c Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 5 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: Very much enjoying the information posted by @dbastin and @frednork. Keep up the good work fellas. @dbastin you have the JCAT signature gold LAN cable? I don’t believe I’ve seen you post a comment about this cable yet? Maybe I am wrong. Having myself recent heard the AIM Shieldio NA7 which has opened my eyes to Ethernet cables considerably, I would value your thoughts on the JCAT. @Assisirecently lent me his ENO Ethernet filter. I’ve been playing around with it, hoping it would do something similar to what the AIM NA7 did. I tried it with and without my Uptone ER, also upstream and downstream from the Renolabs switch. Unfortunately, it’s overall effect seemed very minor, particularly upstream from the Renolabs. But even downstream, being the last link into the streaming input, it mostly seemed to muddy fine detail. As has been mentioned a few times, streaming hifi systems seem to a bit uniquely unpredictable when subjected to Ethernet tweaks. I have no idea why, but the ENO is not for me. Now, I just need to convince @Assisito lend me his Waversa filter I also tried @AssisiENO and it was fitted after my Renolabs switch. The improvement was subtle, and not enough to justify the expense. I have a theory, using good quality Audio Revive Ethernet cables throughout in tandem with the Renolabs, (as I have),- it is already cleaning up the signal to the point of not rewarding many tweaks. Remember that the Renolabs does incorporate a LPS and reclocker. A recent change of interconnects after the test, has provided an improvement that is much larger than either the ENO or AIM NA7. However, now l wonder if I tried them again -that they might reveal their benefits more!
Stereophilus Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 5 minutes ago, evil c said: I also tried @AssisiENO and it was fitted after my Renolabs switch. The improvement was subtle, and not enough to justify the expense. I have a theory, using good quality Audio Revive Ethernet cables throughout in tandem with the Renolabs, (as I have),- it is already cleaning up the signal to the point of not rewarding many tweaks. Remember that the Renolabs does incorporate a LPS and reclocker. A recent change of interconnects after the test, has provided an improvement that is much larger than either the ENO or AIM NA7. However, now l wonder if I tried them again -that they might reveal their benefits more! I have a very similar setup I with AR red cables and Renolabs switch. Unfortunately the Renolabs arrived a few days after I posted the AIM NA7 cable back to @frednork. I really hope they provide the benefit I heard when I used them with the ER. If they don’t, I’d be tempted to go back to just the ER using the AIM NA7… it was that good! 1
evil c Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 7 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: I have a very similar setup I with AR red cables and Renolabs switch. Unfortunately the Renolabs arrived a few days after I posted the AIM NA7 cable back to @frednork. I really hope they provide the benefit I heard when I used them with the ER. If they don’t, I’d be tempted to go back to just the ER using the AIM NA7… it was that good! Unfortunately I had to rely on a relatively short test period, and largely by myself with muso son offering his ears briefly. But he couldn't pick up on differences like l could, years of careful calibration of my senses LOL! I did mention to John and Mark, it would be good to repeat the process with others . Not scientific, but still worthwhile even just to socialize! Believe that the Renolabs is at the very least, equal to the ER, and superior with integration of multiple Ethernet devices. Many visitors have marvelled at it's build quality and construction.
Stereophilus Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 21 minutes ago, evil c said: I did mention to John and Mark, it would be good to repeat the process with others . Not scientific, but still worthwhile even just to socialize! Any excuse! I find get-togethers the worst way to pick SQ differences… I’m too busy with the food and wine! 21 minutes ago, evil c said: Believe that the Renolabs is at the very least, equal to the ER, and superior with integration of multiple Ethernet devices. Many visitors have marvelled at it's build quality and construction. I’d say the Renolabs is a notch above the ER, even when the ER has a good LPS and is grounded separately. It’s very solid!
Assisi Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 2 hours ago, Stereophilus said: Now, I just need to convince @Assisito lend me his Waversa filter That is a big ask. it will be done. The shop that it came from would like it back to use for more demonstrations. So far no go from me. Two of the reference have been presold on the basis of a listen only to the smaller filter and trust. John
Assisi Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 12 hours ago, frednork said: I note the Taiko has one. It is interesting what they say about it. sorry its long but interesting I think. This quote stood out for me “We have not heard any networking setup make a bigger difference than a high quality USB cable.” In a survey 67% of Taiko users are USB only. Nearly 20% are Ethernet and 9.5% are both. So, the emphasis is strongly towards USB. Audio Ethernet and switches may have some way to go in development yet. It is probable that Audio Ethernet may be more applicable to higher end audio whilst USB is more universal and will remain the only option for many applications for a very long time to come. Who is going to spend serious money on the network and components if the rest of the system costs much less? Nobody. I haven’t read much about Taiko on the Whatsbest forum lately. A while ago I think that there was mention that Taiko was developing a network switch. I expect that it will cost serious money. Given the following that Taiko has and if the switch performs as planned, I expect that the above stats may shift a bit. As well Paul McGowan from PS Audio in his inimitable style has not been enthused about Ethernet. My words. It may not suit their niche market. I have predicted though that when McGowan hears a Ethernet network setup that grabs his attention, PS Audio will soon after have a switch. John
frednork Posted November 17, 2021 Posted November 17, 2021 2 hours ago, Stereophilus said: I really hope they provide the benefit I heard when I used them with the ER. If they don’t, I’d be tempted to go back to just the ER using the AIM NA7… it was that good! All my evaluation was with the renolabs in the downstream position.
AccuTidal Posted November 18, 2021 Posted November 18, 2021 Regarding wifi.. Has anyone here tried these netgear? https://www.netgear.com/home/wifi/mesh/rbk852/
TDX Posted November 18, 2021 Posted November 18, 2021 10 minutes ago, AccuMagi said: Regarding wifi.. Has anyone here tried these netgear? https://www.netgear.com/home/wifi/mesh/rbk852/ I’m always using mesh, currently google mesh.
AccuTidal Posted November 18, 2021 Posted November 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, TDX said: I’m always using mesh, currently google mesh. How is sq vs lan?
TDX Posted November 18, 2021 Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, AccuMagi said: How is sq vs lan? I find wifi still not stable enough when streaming. I use Ethernet cable from mesh extender to the streamer.
davewantsmoore Posted November 19, 2021 Posted November 19, 2021 14 hours ago, AccuMagi said: Regarding wifi.. Has anyone here tried these netgear? https://www.netgear.com/home/wifi/mesh/rbk852/ I tend to shy away from faster wifi for audio, as the speed is simply irrelevant... but the higher frequency, more advanced, wifi modes on newer gear can be more finicky (and prone to momentary "drop outs"). It depends a lot on your situation though.... eg. how far away are the wifi device(s), what are the walls made of, and how much power is around you on what frequencies, ie. is there "congestion" in your neghbourhood. I run a seperate wifi network just for my audio using an old 2.4ghz only router to avoid any of those issue (and also contention from other devices). It doesn't make any difference to AQ, except for reliability.
dbastin Posted November 19, 2021 Author Posted November 19, 2021 47 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said: I run a seperate wifi network just for my audio using an old 2.4ghz only router to avoid any of those issue (and also contention from other devices). Hmm, I'm tempted to make a new thread about wifi ... I use a low gain 2.4GHz access point solely for the last link to endpoint, and roon control which is sometimes sluggish but may not be if it had a text only mode.
dbastin Posted November 19, 2021 Author Posted November 19, 2021 On 17/11/2021 at 4:52 PM, Stereophilus said: you have the JCAT signature gold LAN cable? I don’t believe I’ve seen you post a comment about this cable yet? Maybe I am wrong. ... I would value your thoughts on the JCAT. You are correct, I have not yet posted about the 3 cables I have: JCAT Signature Gold Shunyata Sigma Synergistic Research Atmosphere X Reference I felt my system has not been worthy enough to comment on these outstanding cables, but now perhaps it is, however now I use wifi as the most critical link - to the endpoint. I got them on used market all over a year ago, bought based on confidence gained from reviews, forums and some first hand experience with other products from these manufacturers. My recollection of them is faded. I will refresh it soon, but in the meantime ... They are all different sound, and the Atmosphere can change its sound signature by way of its tuning bullet and to some extent adding ground wires which gives it considerable advantages over the others, although the HD ground wires add to the cost. The grounding really enhances its performance by reducing the noise floor while retaining the signature. Bear in mind I am in deep with almost a full suite of Synergistic Research Atmosphere and Galileo SX, Powercell SE and Active Ground Block SE, passive room treatments, etc, etc so I seem to enjoy its house sound - black noise floor, clear midrange, holographic imaging, high resolution etc. Honestly, I'd say the preference of any of these is firstly dependent on where in its evolution your system is (mostly in terms of reducing noise floor), its overall balance between 'detailed' and 'musical', and then on how the music coming through them makes you feel. Shunyata Sigma in particular has a sense of calm and serenity which is magical, and its depth of sound stage, removal of harshness and thereby revealing the fine details of performance and venue are hall marks. Synergisitic Atmos is different and overall brings forward more details and midrange clarity, seems more energetic, and with the tuning bullet removed conveys a dose of Sigma magic which is a very pleasing blend. JCAT Signature was the first of these I got, so my memory is worst, however it is probably quite similar overall the Atmos with bullet removed but perhaps more like the Sigma and less revealing midrange. I can certainly say, overall it is easily better (overall lower noise) than Wireworld Platinum which itself is a high performer. The bottom line is, this highlights different ideals of what is right as perceived by their designers, and their motivation to have a distinctive sound that differs from their competition. This is why there is such variety in audio. However, don't despair, with ethernet, you can have it all. Audiobacon's review of SOtM ISO CAT LAN filter and cables highlights that daisy-chaining cables blends their qualities. https://audiobacon.net/2017/07/09/sotm-iso-cat6-special-edition-the-flavors-of-audiophile-ethernet/ Therefore, as I have a few places for cables in my upstream series, I use them all ... nbn > Cat5e > Atmos > ER > Fibre > Router > JCAT > Server > Sigma > ER > Atmos > WAP - - - Devialet I know, crazy right?! I really need to rationalise. Now that my system is quite enhanced since I got these, I will reassess them all soon, using as last link to endpoint instead of wifi/WAP (a totally unfairly high benchmark in my case). And, it will be painful to go back to no wifi. 1
Stereophilus Posted November 20, 2021 Posted November 20, 2021 On 17/11/21 at 10:40 PM, Assisi said: That is a big ask. it will be done. The shop that it came from would like it back to use for more demonstrations. So far no go from me. Two of the reference have been presold on the basis of a listen only to the smaller filter and trust. John I should apologise John, I didn’t mean for my request to sound overly insistent. Rather, with my high expectations for the ENO somewhat dashed, I’m interested in the hearing the Waversa filter at some point in the future. No rush. Huge thanks for your generosity of time and expensive equipment.
Assisi Posted November 22, 2021 Posted November 22, 2021 On 15/11/2021 at 11:10 AM, Assisi said: Early last week I was able to listen to both versions of the External Filters. I now have had the Reference version in my system for week. There is no mention of the Reference version on the Internet that I can find at this time. It has not been officially announced/released by Waversa at this time. I now have had the Reference filter going for a couple of weeks. Wonderful outcome. This is a link to some comments about the reference filter. There are actually 5 versions. I only have the LAN one and that is enough for me! Scroll down to see the oscilloscope results. https://www-hificlub-co-kr.translate.goog/ao/mall/ao_prod_view_n20.asp?sale_code=13913&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui John
dbastin Posted November 22, 2021 Author Posted November 22, 2021 Waversa Isolator ... https://waversasystems.com/wlan-isolator-ext1, you can see inside the box some sort of coil! I image the Reference is just a bigger 'coil'. It is probably not really an isolator, like fibre or wifi, but its not really what they'd call an electronic filter either. It probably has a similar effect as the EM cell inside the Synergistic Research switch, active ground block,. powercell, etc. The set up diagrams reiterate what I have been saying for some time ... isolate between devices. Ah, but also a new version of Waversa Smart Hub (switch/USB hub), with OCXO clock ... https://waversasystems.com/wsmarthub30
Hydrology Posted November 22, 2021 Posted November 22, 2021 I've committed to one of the Waversa Smart Hub 3.0 - I also have a Atlas Mavros Ethernet cable coming for evaluation this week.
dbastin Posted November 22, 2021 Author Posted November 22, 2021 7 minutes ago, Hydrology said: 've committed to one of the Waversa Smart Hub 3.0 Love to hear your views how it compares to PheonixNet I recall you had. 1
Hydrology Posted November 23, 2021 Posted November 23, 2021 For anyone interested in Waversa's Isolation products range (as its hard to get all of this info in one place), here is the list with AUD RRP:- 1
dbastin Posted November 23, 2021 Author Posted November 23, 2021 1 hour ago, Hydrology said: For anyone interested in Waversa's Isolation products range (as its hard to get all of this info in one place) Info about Waversa products is hard to get generally, not just these products. For instance, what are the internal versions? I've resurrected this thread which is probably more appropriate for discussion about these isolators ...
Recommended Posts