Ethernet System for Audio: putting it all together

[dbastin]

3 hours ago, Grizaudio said:

Interesting video. An honest opinion on the topic. 

 

This has been posted elsewhere.  He basically says, from an engineering perspective, it should not make a difference and he installed it for 'peace of mind', but gives no observation or opinion about if it actually made a difference in his system.

 

So in short the video is a plug to pay him money for peace of mind.  He should sell insurance ... 

[omara31]

Plenty of good advice and experience in this thread I am finding interesting and helpful.

 

Anyone know of the nose reduction effect of adding a LPS unit to a modem router?  
 

Assume that a audio network switch (connected to the modem/router) and quality cabling is already being utilised.

 

 

 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, omara31 said:

Anyone know of the nose reduction effect of adding a LPS unit to a modem router?  

 

There is a small difference.  The challenge is to justify the much higher cost of a good LPS for the modem router.  It is probably more cost effective to get an audio focussed switch.

[MrBurns84]

4 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

 

There is a small difference.  The challenge is to justify the much higher cost of a good LPS for the modem router.  It is probably more cost effective to get an audio focussed switch.

Yep..did this test a while back and it was almost negligible or noticeable improvement if that at all.  If you have one lying around unused, sure go for it.  

I watched a YT vid recently from 'small green computing' the owner mentioned that its hard and not cost effective to control noise for the entire end to end chain of your home network, and quite frankly said its best to focus on what comes into your streamer's end point and lower the noise there.

Edited October 14, 2022 by MrBurns84

[omara31]

Thanks Mr Burns and Snoop,  that is more or less what I had been thinking..  I have those other (streamer power, cabling, switches etc & they all made a discernible difference) bases  covered and was wondering about that further tweak.    

[dbastin]

12 hours ago, omara31 said:

Plenty of good advice and experience in this thread I am finding interesting and helpful.

 

Anyone know of the nose reduction effect of adding a LPS unit to a modem router?  
 

Assume that a audio network switch (connected to the modem/router) and quality cabling is already being utilised.

 

4 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

There is a small difference. 

 

54 minutes ago, MrBurns84 said:

it was almost negligible or noticeable improvement if that at all

It seems to me it really depends on:

• what level of noise your system has from other sources (other network devices, all cabling, AC power, etc), the difference a better PSU on the router makes might be drowned out by other noise.
• what else is plugged into the router, how much noise that is injecting, and if the AC outlet is shared with other noisy things.

5 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

The challenge is to justify the much higher cost

 

58 minutes ago, MrBurns84 said:

its hard and not cost effective to control noise for the entire end to end chain of your home network,

I'd say the cost justification is really dependent on what difference it makes in your system (given its noise floor - see above), how much you can perceive and appreciate the difference, and how much you personally value any improvement in the context of your financial situation.

 

There are more cost effective things to do in a network or other elements of the audio system before improving the PSU of the router, but once they are all done properly there are still gains to be made.

 

And keep in mind improvements seem to be cumulative, albeit more costly the more you do.

 

Having said all that, I would not be without excellent power for my router because the improvement it provided was not small and it is presently only one of three network devices in the pathway my audio system uses, and one of those is powered by a $35 USB powerbank that delivers equivalent low noise power to $1000s of AC/LPS power source and cords!

[Assisi]

1 hour ago, omara31 said:

Thanks Mr Burns and Snoop,  that is more or less what I had been thinking..  I have those other (streamer power, cabling, switches etc & they all made a discernible difference) bases  covered and was wondering about that further tweak.    

The advice from @dbastin above is spot on.  Everything matters and it is important to do the more obvious stuff first.  The lower level benefits can wait to the end when you are ready.

John

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, dbastin said:

There are more cost effective things to do in a compared to an audio focussednetwork or other elements of the audio system before improving the PSU of the router, but once they are all done properly there are still gains to be made.

 

And keep in mind improvements seem to be cumulative, albeit more costly the more you do.

I agree with those sentiments, but because it is cumulative, it becomes a HUGE rabbit hole.  . 

 

@omara31, it does depend on how far you want to try and tweak things.  Dean has explored the warren in detail and even mapped out the routes (pun intended!) . I decided to climb out.   

[dbastin]

For those that are brave and patient enough to diving into Mikrotik RouterOS software, this is what I use as a wifi access point powered by USB powerbank, but it could be configured as a router ...

 

https://mikrotik.com/product/RBmAPL-2nD

 

I note quite a few Mikrotik wifi things use RouterOS, but not many can be powered by a low cost readily available plug and play battery.  I wont be exploring that possibility because I have a Mikrotik CRS 305 as fibre hub, switch and router.

[Grizaudio]

6 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

I agree with those sentiments, but because it is cumulative, it becomes a HUGE rabbit hole.  . 

 

@omara31, it does depend on how far you want to try and tweak things.  Dean has explored the warren in detail and even mapped out the routes (pun intended!) . I decided to climb out.   

Smart. 
More money for alcohol, which has a much bigger impact on SQ.  
 

Edited October 14, 2022 by Grizaudio

[omara31]

Thanks for all the input.  It certainly is a process where there always seems to be another potential tweak to explore.  I can’t help myself and more than half my listening is on my vinyl set up. 

[Grizaudio]

On 14/10/2022 at 11:47 AM, omara31 said:

Thanks Mr Burns and Snoop,  that is more or less what I had been thinking..  I have those other (streamer power, cabling, switches etc & they all made a discernible difference) bases  covered and was wondering about that further tweak.    

 

An opinion. 

 

I recommend you consider/addressing Room acoustics and Room correction (Target curve correction) next.

The improvements and changes will be significant, assuming your implementation is done well. 

 

A few links to explore: 

-         Rephase https://rephase.org/

-         Dirac https://www.dirac.com/

-         REW https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

-         Audiolense https://juicehifi.com/download/

 

[dbastin]

36 minutes ago, Grizaudio said:

 

An opinion. 

 

I recommend you consider/addressing Room acoustics and Room correction (Target curve correction) next.

The improvements and changes will be significant, assuming your implementation is done well. 

 

A few links to explore: 

-         Rephase https://rephase.org/

-         Dirac https://www.dirac.com/

-         REW https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

-         Audiolense https://juicehifi.com/download/

 

Art Norton at ASC is of the opinion 'articulation' matters more so uses his MATT test to discover at what frequencies  acoustics cause blurry/smearing rather than clear articulation. I am focussing on the before target curve eq and Audiolense.  Anyhow, that is a whole other topic ...

[Assisi]

On 14/09/2022 at 8:22 AM, Artnet said:

 

I think it will have an internal grounding to the chassis, but you could add one of these if you are using a grounding box. Mine has an RJ45 to ground cable.

 

 

 

 

I have had a Puritan Groundmaster connected to a solid copper 3mt rod in the ground for sometime.  I was pleased with the beneficial results with the lower noise floor outcome.  When I saw the above post I contacted @Artnet regarding his experience with his Routemaster.  He had not had time to install his and he very generously offered to lend me his unit and cables.  I have had it for a few weeks and it is going back today.  It makes connection to various units much easier than the way I had  my Groundmaster connected.  There are options as to the ends of the cables and the connection to components.   I could now easily connect switches for example via RJ45.  It was also simple to connect and disconnect the two units and compare the results.  There was a benefit that improved over time.  Last Thursday a doubter had a listen.  Previously he had "approved" of the Groundmaster.  Not so sure that the Routemaster would be a benefit.  He left giving the combination a definite thumbs up.

 

 

I will be ordering one to complete my grounding setup

 

Thanks @Artnet

John

[Artnet]

7 hours ago, Assisi said:

I will be ordering one to complete my grounding setup

 

Thanks @Artnet

 

Very pleased it worked for you John. 

It was your original post on burying a grounding rod and using the Ground master that encouraged me down this road. 

 

The greatest effect for me was with the Groundmaster, connecting to chassis ground on a power conditioner and at this stage only to mains earth.  Digging down with a copper rod outside as per your description I suspect will bring greater effect.

Grounding other components with the Routmaster is more "icing on the cake" as Mike Lester says, and have experimented with the Routmaster only a little with DAC and CDT and have been rewarded in doing so.

 

Not yet being a streamer as  such, (that doesn't sound right)  I was interested to hear from you about its benefits or not within a network.  So thank you.

 

Let us know when your new grounding set up is complete keen to hear how you implement it in some of that very nice network gear.

[dbastin]

 

[Artnet]

Thank you @dbastin  Re discovered the all things grounding thread yesterday and tagged it

Edited October 31, 2022 by Artnet
correcting refference

[Assisi]

Further to my post above I ordered a Puritan Routemaster after trying the loan one from @Artnet .   My unit and cables arrived early this week.  I have six devices connected at the moment including all switches via RJ45.  Upon connection to the Groundmaster there was an immediate and noticeable benefit.  There was more space or air around or  between the instruments and or vocals.  Less of the proverbial noise floor.  As well the image moved slightly backwards.  I am very pleased with outcome.  The grounding setup has been quite a worthwhile project

 

The Routemaster has capacity for nine connections.  I will wait before I consider doing the other three possibilities.

John

[Nada]

 

[Grizaudio]

Rather than testing the network switches, would it not be more logical to test the analog outputs of a select number of streamer/DAC's connected to the network switches being tested?

 

 

 

 

 

[NPC]

21 hours ago, Grizaudio said:

Rather than testing the network switches, would it not be more logical to test the analog outputs of a select number of streamer/DAC's connected to the network switches being tested?

 

 

Bang-on. What the video showed is noise above 5MHz frequency (about 25 times higher than any bat hears, and 200+ times above that of human hearing) at below minus 50dB. 

 

With the multitude of tests I've done to compare switches, shielded and unshielded patches, and streamer/DAC combos that showed that not all streamer/DAC combos reject noise that has been deliberately introduced and propagated, then your point is probably the most salient. Good observation and a point that is not acknowledged often enough i.e. if you can hear differences in your streamer/DAC when changing components upstream, you might want to have a closer look at your choice of streamer/DAC.

[BugPowderDust]

22 hours ago, Grizaudio said:

Rather than testing the network switches, would it not be more logical to test the analog outputs of a select number of streamer/DAC's connected to the network switches being tested?

Like this? https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/do-audiophile-network-switches-make-a-difference-video.20316/

[Assisi]

2 hours ago, El Tel said:

if you can hear differences in your streamer/DAC when changing components upstream, you might want to have a closer look at your choice of streamer/DAC.

Based on my experience, the logic of this comment makes no sense at all to me .  If you change upstream components and there is difference, why look at the Streamer/DAC?  I can and do change upstream components, grounding, cables  and filters and there can be a definite change in listening outcome.  The Streamer and DAC do not change.

John

[Grizaudio]

With all this discussion about noise, I wonder if network isolation might be a lower cost option worth considering.  

Example: https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-iso-plus-2

 

As an example: I've had good results with my 7055-B Intona which galvanically isolates my source to DAC. 

 

Reading through the Intona ASR thread, my observations seem counter to much of the advice offered there, with most comments suggesting these devices are only good for removing audible noise and not for improving sound quality. I must admit, my system had no obvious audible "noise", yet the Intona delivered a very nice improvement in top end clarity, which after the fact seems in line with other users who have reported similar changes to HF presentation.  

 

[dbastin]

On 28/11/2022 at 10:12 AM, Grizaudio said:

Rather than testing the network switches, would it not be more logical to test the analog outputs of a select number of streamer/DAC's connected to the network switches being tested?

That would simply test the streamer/DACs to discover how well it rejects noise coming into it.  It does not test if a switch is generating or passing on noise.  I use wifi to connect to my Devialet and completely isolate it from noise on the network, and can still hear pretty much every change I make to the upstream network, even upstream of a fibre link (I am not sure if that is a curse or blessing).  So I agree with John ...

 

1 hour ago, Assisi said:

If you change upstream components and there is difference, why look at the Streamer/DAC?

 

3 hours ago, El Tel said:

What the video showed is noise above 5MHz frequency (about 25 times higher than any bat hears, and 200+ times above that of human hearing) at below minus 50dB. 

Perhaps it is possible that noise is still affecting the function of electronics that ultimately affect the SQ outcome, even if the noise itself is not audible.