Ethernet switches - PartA: Switches List, info & Experience

[Assisi]

8 hours ago, AccuMagi said:

So my second renolabs switch arrived yesterday. I had it hooked in over night in series. Photo attached. 
 

What I noticed today is noise ratio further improved. The tonality much more natural, engaging, and very listenable for extended period… Sum-up: Not good…, too additive to my setup. 

Hi Chanh,

My experience is that more than one switch in the chain is better than just one.  For me when the switches are different to each other it is better than having the all same.  Each switch has it own signature and you end up with the a combined synergy.  It would be interesting if you could even borrow another switch from one of your mates and try things out.  Like everything in audio the second Renolabs will probably  improve with settling in time.

John

 

[AccuTidal]

Thanks John. 
I am keen on trying various ethernet cables. Not always be possible in this regional city of Perth. 
Here’s another quick capture night vs day time. 

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by AccuMagi

[dbastin]

I just came across this ...

https://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/ansuz-powerswitch-x-tc-network-switch

 

At the end someone posts a thought provoking comment posing the question ... is all this expense on streamed digital audio still good value compared to equal or less expense on disc players?

[davewantsmoore]

 

19 hours ago, dbastin said:

At the end someone posts a thought provoking comment posing the question ... is all this expense on streamed digital audio still good value compared to equal or less expense on disc players?

 

If you need to go to this much trouble to stop the network impacting the playback quality..... then I'd say the answer would be no.

 

It's funny (is that the right word?!) that this .... ie. pondering the merits of a traditional "disc spinner" (cd player and DAC in one box) is in many ways what led me to my current system design philosophy.

 

[TP1]

21 hours ago, dbastin said:

I just came across this ...

https://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/ansuz-powerswitch-x-tc-network-switch

 

At the end someone posts a thought provoking comment posing the question ... is all this expense on streamed digital audio still good value compared to equal or less expense on disc players?

 

In my experience to get a better sound than computer audio through the same DAC , a CD. spinner will cost a hell of a lot more.  

[dbastin]

The target with digital audio is to get the data to the DAC.  CD players, PS audio memory player, computer audio, servers and players etc all do that.  But there are pros and cons to each.  I gather there is still more to discover and solve with ethernet.

 

One aspect is transmission of the data from one point to the next.  SPDIF and AES seemed to become favoured less than USB, maybe due to desire for higher res.  Now ethernet is on a journey like USB was (and probably still is).

 

I have not used a CD player for a decade or more.  I have been curious to do a SQ shoot out between my digital set up, an equivalent cost CD player, and equivalent cost vinyl player.

 

The many conveniences of computer based audio, access to enormous audio libraries for the cost of subscription and with roon the benefit of its analysis and tools to discover music combine into a quantum of difference compared to physical media.

 

From a 'hobby' perspective, ethernet has a plethora to tinker with, followed by vinyl, and CD players have relatively little tinkering on offer.

 

We all get different satisfaction from all these aspects  And some things are more satisfying when achieved from tinkering.

 

I lIken this to sailing, another money pit hobby.

 

One can choose a cruising yacht, set a course on auto-helm and enjoy the journey sipping beverages, enjoying company etc.

 

One can choose a performance skiff, continuously adjust course, sail trim, every bit of hardware, etc to optimise the vessel, get very wet, even capsize,  and enjoy the journey differently to cruising.

 

Of course there's many variations between these extremes.  Just like hifi.

[AccuTidal]

On the topic of varies medium..  I for once, did not take chance nor took it for granted. Turntable, CD transport, and streamer. 
I have them all here…, Shoot out will be fun…. Though be warned, CD-transport is noticeable behind computer server here for identical mastered/recording. 
 

I can facilitate a gtg for this if any taker here? 

Edited July 4, 2021 by AccuMagi

[RoHo]

On 04/07/2021 at 2:58 PM, davewantsmoore said:

 

 

 

It's funny (is that the right word?!) that this .... ie. pondering the merits of a traditional "disc spinner" (cd player and DAC in one box) is in many ways what led me to my current system design philosophy.

 

So you concluded that audio via computer network is less "technically problematic" than from a physical disc?  Interesting....

[davewantsmoore]

49 minutes ago, RoHo said:

So you concluded that audio via computer network is less "technically problematic" than from a physical disc?  Interesting....

I guess the below is a longwinded way of saying "no not a comp vs cd player" .... but a "single box design", vs many boxes and cables (and problems).    The designer optimises everything happening inside a CD player (for example) ...... but a system with 14 boxes and as many power cords, and even more links from here to there.... is likely a "mess".

 

-----

 

No... it isn't that straight forward.

 

The philosophy is about eliminating things which "make a difference" .... not optimising them.

 

It is often thought that all thing "have a sound"....or "make a difference".   Examples include:

 

Ethernet, switches, cables, power supplies

Speaker cables

Speaker crossover components

Power cables

Parts and power supplies inside a computer

Digital cables

Analogue cables

Etc. etc.

 

Which is the best capacitor to put in a speaker crossover?   If they all sound different then this isn't a reason to buy $600 capacitors..... it's the reason to not use capacitors, as they are all distortion generating devices.

 

If hooking your system up to ethernet (or the power supplies of networking devices) changes the sound ..... then which is the best ethernet switch?... the best power supply?   cable?  clock?

 

None.   This is the reason to not let ethernet anywhere near your audio system.

If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.

 

Have a source which uses wifi... and optimises the next link so that it is unaffected.

 

In a computer, this would be done similar to a CD player.... although you can go a lot further.    Eg.  I2S (or similar) created by a battery powered computer.... run through galv isolated flip/flops to a separately battery powered digital output board.

 

 

This will be seen as "ignorance" by many .... as "how could wifi ever produce equivalent sound".

It's all just an engineering problem.... and there is zero reason why it can't.

 

I have had as complicated a system as they come in decades gone by.

Now I have 1 power cable per speaker and 1 digital link per speaker...... zero other cables, etc. in system  (source is batteries).   Speakers run from seperate mains transformer .... and digital links are aggressively reclocked at DAC/amplifier.

 

[RoHo]

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

I guess the below is a longwinded way of saying "no not a comp vs cd player" .... but a "single box design", vs many boxes and cables (and problems).    The designer optimises everything happening inside a CD player (for example) ...... but a system with 14 boxes and as many power cords, and even more links from here to there.... is likely a "mess".

 

-----

 

No... it isn't that straight forward.

 

The philosophy is about eliminating things which "make a difference" .... not optimising them.

 

It is often thought that all thing "have a sound"....or "make a difference".   Examples include:

 

Ethernet, switches, cables, power supplies

Speaker cables

Speaker crossover components

Power cables

Parts and power supplies inside a computer

Digital cables

Analogue cables

Etc. etc.

 

Which is the best capacitor to put in a speaker crossover?   If they all sound different then this isn't a reason to buy $600 capacitors..... it's the reason to not use capacitors, as they are all distortion generating devices.

 

If hooking your system up to ethernet (or the power supplies of networking devices) changes the sound ..... then which is the best ethernet switch?... the best power supply?   cable?  clock?

 

None.   This is the reason to not let ethernet anywhere near your audio system.

If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.

 

Have a source which uses wifi... and optimises the next link so that it is unaffected.

 

In a computer, this would be done similar to a CD player.... although you can go a lot further.    Eg.  I2S (or similar) created by a battery powered computer.... run through galv isolated flip/flops to a separately battery powered digital output board.

 

 

This will be seen as "ignorance" by many .... as "how could wifi ever produce equivalent sound".

It's all just an engineering problem.... and there is zero reason why it can't.

 

I have had as complicated a system as they come in decades gone by.

Now I have 1 power cable per speaker and 1 digital link per speaker...... zero other cables, etc. in system  (source is batteries).   Speakers run from seperate mains transformer .... and digital links are aggressively reclocked at DAC/amplifier.

 

Thanks for that comprehensive reply, Dave. 

I'd love to explore your thoughts on the overlap between technical theory, subjective listening and "personal anxieties" but that would be taking things way off topic.

 

[Assisi]

5 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

If hooking your system up to ethernet (or the power supplies of networking devices) changes the sound ..... then which is the best ethernet switch?... the best power supply?   cable?  clock?

 

None.   This is the reason to not let ethernet anywhere near your audio system.

If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source

Does it matter which switch is the best.  It may depend upon each individual’s circumstances.  It is no different to any other audio component.  It is all about finding out was is right for you.  Right now, to some extent maybe Ethernet and net working are the new kids on the block and for some it is still a new learning experience.  I won’t be surprised if the use of USB disappears substantially over time for serious audio use.

 

 

I do not do testing and comparisons.  Recently though I decided to try streaming without the serious components working just to find out was I deluding myself.  All switches turned off and disconnected.  All I had was a Netgear 109 switch with a SMPS and two cheap cat5s connecting the NAS and the streamer.  In relative terms I was surprised how pathetic the outcome was .    I reconnected the switches etc.  Sheer bliss.  It was if I had for a short time I had been in a parallel universe. 

Have you experienced or listened to a system with one or more audio quality switches and networking etc?

 

I am waiting for a new component for my network to come from OS.  It is all work in progress.

My experience and my opinion of course.

John

Edited July 6, 2021 by Assisi

[acg]

5 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

I guess the below is a longwinded way of saying "no not a comp vs cd player" .... but a "single box design", vs many boxes and cables (and problems).    The designer optimises everything happening inside a CD player (for example) ...... but a system with 14 boxes and as many power cords, and even more links from here to there.... is likely a "mess".

 

-----

 

No... it isn't that straight forward.

 

The philosophy is about eliminating things which "make a difference" .... not optimising them.

 

It is often thought that all thing "have a sound"....or "make a difference".   Examples include:

 

Ethernet, switches, cables, power supplies

Speaker cables

Speaker crossover components

Power cables

Parts and power supplies inside a computer

Digital cables

Analogue cables

Etc. etc.

 

Which is the best capacitor to put in a speaker crossover?   If they all sound different then this isn't a reason to buy $600 capacitors..... it's the reason to not use capacitors, as they are all distortion generating devices.

 

If hooking your system up to ethernet (or the power supplies of networking devices) changes the sound ..... then which is the best ethernet switch?... the best power supply?   cable?  clock?

 

None.   This is the reason to not let ethernet anywhere near your audio system.

If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.

 

Have a source which uses wifi... and optimises the next link so that it is unaffected.

 

In a computer, this would be done similar to a CD player.... although you can go a lot further.    Eg.  I2S (or similar) created by a battery powered computer.... run through galv isolated flip/flops to a separately battery powered digital output board.

 

 

This will be seen as "ignorance" by many .... as "how could wifi ever produce equivalent sound".

It's all just an engineering problem.... and there is zero reason why it can't.

 

I have had as complicated a system as they come in decades gone by.

Now I have 1 power cable per speaker and 1 digital link per speaker...... zero other cables, etc. in system  (source is batteries).   Speakers run from seperate mains transformer .... and digital links are aggressively reclocked at DAC/amplifier.

 

 

Dave, I don't necessarily agree with your 'single box' or 'few boxes' solution (it excludes analogue sources for one) but I definitely agree with the reasoning behind it.  Would be nice to hear more about your system in another thread as it seems you rarely mention it and you often have so much common sense to share on many topics.  Please tag me in if you start one.

[acg]

9 minutes ago, Assisi said:

Have you experienced or listened to a system with one or more audio quality switches and networking etc?

 

You are not asking me of course, but I have not.  There is no switch required in my premium dac setup but I have started to play around with streaming and have built a dac especially for it.  Went to town on the USB isolation (JLSounds card with two exceptionally well suited power supplies) and am running it from a simple RPi4...sounds very good.  Will experiment more with time.

[davewantsmoore]

23 minutes ago, Assisi said:

Does it matter which switch is the best.

In the context of "how to get good sound" .... Yes.

 

23 minutes ago, Assisi said:

Right now, to some extent maybe Ethernet and net working are the new kids on the block and for some it is still a new learning experience.

I think that's really really over complicating things.    How to make a DAC/amplifier work well, hasn't changed.

 

23 minutes ago, Assisi said:

I won’t be surprised if the use of USB disappears substantially over time for serious audio use.

Indeed, I think it will tend toward everything like that disappearing.    ie.  don't just have the DAC and amplifier and speaker in one box.... when you can have the player in the speaker too.

 

23 minutes ago, Assisi said:

I do not do testing and comparisons.  Recently though I decided to try streaming without the serious components working just to find out was I deluding myself.  All switches turned off and disconnected.  All I had was a Netgear 109 switch with a SMPS and two cheap cat5s connecting the NAS and the streamer.  In relative terms I was surprised how pathetic the outcome was .  I reconnected the switches etc.  Sheer bliss.

To me that says something not working properly ..... what device in your system is so susceptible to noise/jitter that they behave that way.

[davewantsmoore]

23 minutes ago, acg said:

Dave, I don't necessarily agree with your 'single box' or 'few boxes' solution (it excludes analogue sources for one)

Analogue to digital converter.

 

23 minutes ago, acg said:

Please tag me in if you start one.

Heh... been meaning to do that for a long long time.

 

One day....

 

[acg]

19 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Analogue to digital converter.

 

For me an engineering step too far...but you knew that.

[Stereophilus]

8 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

I guess the below is a longwinded way of saying "no not a comp vs cd player" .... but a "single box design", vs many boxes and cables (and problems).    The designer optimises everything happening inside a CD player (for example) ...... but a system with 14 boxes and as many power cords, and even more links from here to there.... is likely a "mess".

 

-----

 

No... it isn't that straight forward.

 

The philosophy is about eliminating things which "make a difference" .... not optimising them.

 

It is often thought that all thing "have a sound"....or "make a difference".   Examples include:

 

Ethernet, switches, cables, power supplies

Speaker cables

Speaker crossover components

Power cables

Parts and power supplies inside a computer

Digital cables

Analogue cables

Etc. etc.

 

Which is the best capacitor to put in a speaker crossover?   If they all sound different then this isn't a reason to buy $600 capacitors..... it's the reason to not use capacitors, as they are all distortion generating devices.

 

If hooking your system up to ethernet (or the power supplies of networking devices) changes the sound ..... then which is the best ethernet switch?... the best power supply?   cable?  clock?

 

None.   This is the reason to not let ethernet anywhere near your audio system.

If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.

 

Have a source which uses wifi... and optimises the next link so that it is unaffected.

 

In a computer, this would be done similar to a CD player.... although you can go a lot further.    Eg.  I2S (or similar) created by a battery powered computer.... run through galv isolated flip/flops to a separately battery powered digital output board.

 

 

This will be seen as "ignorance" by many .... as "how could wifi ever produce equivalent sound".

It's all just an engineering problem.... and there is zero reason why it can't.

 

I have had as complicated a system as they come in decades gone by.

Now I have 1 power cable per speaker and 1 digital link per speaker...... zero other cables, etc. in system  (source is batteries).   Speakers run from seperate mains transformer .... and digital links are aggressively reclocked at DAC/amplifier.

 

You are absolutely right Dave.  It is all just an engineering problem.  However, engineering is a series of compromises in itself. 

 

Sticking all the electronics inside A pair of battery powered speakers connected over WiFi eliminates a lot of problems, but creates a new one. Everything inside a speaker enclosure vibrates when music is played.  Compromise.

 

WiFi is a great idea to for eliminating network jitter.  Auralic have tried this with some success.  Ultimately it still carries some compromise still, even with good engineering.

[davewantsmoore]

46 minutes ago, Stereophilus said:

Sticking all the electronics inside A pair of battery powered speakers connected over WiFi eliminates a lot of problems, but creates a new one. Everything inside a speaker enclosure vibrates when music is played.  Compromise.

That's not unsolvable .....  if it's a problem, then you could put the electronics in a completely seperate box right next to the "speaker" box.... and link with (permanently connected, short) speaker cable.   Unwieldy... but problem solved.

 

Does the level of vibration we are talking about actually affect the electronics?    This is trivial to test.

 

Have you seen inside a Kii Three?  

 

46 minutes ago, Stereophilus said:

WiFi is a great idea to for eliminating network jitter.

Is "network jitter" actually a problem? .... and does wifi even address it?    (I would expect the answer is no and no)

 

46 minutes ago, Stereophilus said:

Ultimately it still carries some compromise still, even with good engineering.

What's the compromise?

[Stereophilus]

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

That's not unsolvable .....  if it's a problem, then you could put the electronics in a completely seperate box right next to the "speaker" box.... and link with (permanently connected, short) speaker cable.   Unwieldy... but problem solved.

Not exactly “solved”, just another compromise.  Using any length of cable to the speaker is less than perfect.  Probably insignificant, i agree.

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

Does the level of vibration we are talking about actually affect the electronics?    This is trivial to test.

I don’t have the answer, but I do read a lot of audio designers explain the negative impact of audible band vibrations on electronics.  Beyond the topic at hand to go further, suffice to say there are whole brands dedicated to selling devices that stop electronics vibrating.

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

Have you seen inside a Kii Three?  

Yes, masterful, and a very good example of excellent engineering.  Perfect….?

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

Is "network jitter" actually a problem? .... and does wifi even address it?    (I would expect the answer is no and no)

Excuse my short hand.  By network jitter I mean anything carried on a network cable that can potentially affect the D/A conversion process.  In the example I provided, Auralic believe Wifi transmission does (in part) address this (assumed) issue.

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

What's the compromise?

That the downstream component receiving the stream requires a wifi antenna and microprocessor to receive the signal.  Are these things a problem? Again, many audio designers would argue yes.

[Assisi]

6 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

How to make a DAC/amplifier work well, hasn't changed.

 

Maybe not but the quality of the signal that the DAC/amplifier receives can determine the final outcome.

 

 

In you post you did not answer what to me is a fundamental question. 

“Have you experienced or listened to a system with one or more audio quality switches and networking etc?”

Too many people pronounce opinions on something that they actually have not experienced.  It is easy to say things that are not based upon actual experience as if it is fact.  I acknowledge that you did say that it was IMVHO 

“If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.”

Reasonably categorical nevertheless if it is not based on experience.  If it, is I would be interested in your comments on your experience?

 

The definitive objective for all of us is to get good sound.  Surely If we all knew the answer, we may all have the same components.  As I said it depends upon the individual circumstance of all of us.  I started with a low-end audio switch.  Over time I have moved up the food a chain.  Definite benefits

 

My DAC depending on one’s perspective is reasonably serious.  It is XLR in. Not on the network at all.  I cannot be absolute but I consider that nothing is not working in my setup properly as you suggest.  Rather the opposite actually.  Nevertheless, there is always room for improvement.

 

The utilisation of a combination of audio switches is an interesting conundrum.  Each different switch can have its own flavour.  Put more than one together and it seems you get a combined or synergistic outcome.  So, what you might say.  Similarly, DACs for example each have their own particular listening outcome flavour.  Who would bother to have in their system 2,3,4,5 or more DACs and pass the signal through each of them interconnected?  Probably nobody.  Who knows the answer?  It is much easier to combine switches than DACs.

 

I know my setup is complicated.  To me there are outcome benefits.  I understand the concept of simplicity which seems to be the path that you and others are on.  Simplicity works for me with Italian food.  Not audio at this time.

John

[davewantsmoore]

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

Maybe not but the quality of the signal that the DAC/amplifier receives can determine the final outcome.

It can.... but it can also be made immune from said quality.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

In you post you did not answer what to me is a fundamental question. 

I find it very interesting that you think this is the "fundamental question"....   If the answer was "No" what would that indicate you about what I am saying (and whether or not it has merit or not).     Hint:  It would change nothing about what I am saying.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

“Have you experienced or listened to a system with one or more audio quality switches and networking etc?”

Yes... but only mine.   (I am an IT infrastructure/networking professional by day.... so it is "relevant to my interests").

 

Only fibre, power supplies and ethernet cables.... not clocks within the switch.

 

That being said,  have never had (in recent times anyways) a system where ethernet wasn't completely isolated from any audio performance.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

Too many people pronounce opinions on something that they actually have not experienced.

My opinion would not change based on any experience.

If it actually works.... then that is the sign of a problem.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

“If putting 5 switches in series actually makes a difference...... then IMVHO this is the reason not to have 5 switches... and to nuke the issue at the source.”

 

Reasonably categorical nevertheless if it is not based on experience.  If it, is I would be interested in your comments on your experience?

My "experience" makes no difference to what I am saying.

 

If you bought a megabuck system and changing ethernet switches changes the sound... then I think you got scammed.

 

Either your DAC/amp is super super duper sensitive to things which it should not be..... or your ethernet equipment is pumping out huge! amounts of noise (which it should not be).

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

My DAC depending on one’s perspective is reasonably serious.

Why is it sensitive to "noise" from your ethernet equipment?   (or it could be some other component in your system, if you your DAC).

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

I cannot be absolute but I consider that nothing is not working in my setup properly as you suggest.

Then why does small changes in noise cause audible differences?

 

This isn't the sign of a "good system"...... it's the sign of a problem.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

Put more than one together and it seems you get a combined or synergistic outcome.  So, what you might say.

Why would the DAC or amplifier change its performance?    This is not what would be expect from a well engineered device.

 

11 hours ago, Assisi said:

I know my setup is complicated.  To me there are outcome benefits.  I understand the concept of simplicity

It isn't about "simplicity".    It is about causing the least distortion to the audio signal.    I would be quite happy to have as complicated system (and have had, in years gone by) as necessary to achieve that.

[MattyW]

Ok, I've a Renolabs Ultimate Audio Switch on order.  The combination of quality LPS, OCXO and quality case cinched the deal for me.  Likewise the sonic improvements described here sound like it's more to my preference than something like an EtherREGEN.

[AccuTidal]

4 minutes ago, MattyW said:

Ok, I've a Renolabs Ultimate Audio Switch on order.  The combination of quality LPS, OCXO and quality case cinched the deal for me.  Likewise the sonic improvements described here sound like it's more to my preference than something like an EtherREGEN.

I hope you will not like it…, so it can be obtained locally at preowned rates. May I PLEASE put forward my genuine interest.., so that I can obtain my third unit…, for further improving my Digital setup!

Regardless, I plan to borrow one locally for the trio testing… will report back once  am able. 

[dbastin]

13 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

that is the sign of a problem.

Hey Dave,

I hear where you are coming from.  However, my feeling is the nature of comments you are making at this point are better suited to the intent of the Part B topic/thread which you have also contributed to.  

 

The intent of this Part A is really to share experiences with the audio grade switches to help people understand what they do differently and perhaps help them decide if they will try/buy one (or 6 ).

 

In other words, to discuss the 'solutions' rather than 'problems'.

 

It seems to me manufacturers of audio gear have generally taken the approach to leave the solutions to stand alone  'accessories' like switches, cables, clocks, etc.  This is similar to power conditioning which is typically not solved within an audio product but rather addressed in a seperate conditioner.

[MattyW]

20 hours ago, AccuMagi said:

I hope you will not like it…, so it can be obtained locally at preowned rates. May I PLEASE put forward my genuine interest.., so that I can obtain my third unit…, for further improving my Digital setup!

Regardless, I plan to borrow one locally for the trio testing… will report back once  am able. 

 

Keep your grubby little hands off..... Um, I mean no.

Edited July 8, 2021 by MattyW