Router and Ethernet Switch suggestions

[lmitche]

15 minutes ago, GUTB said:

I've noticed streaming hi-fi quality from Tidal is a noticeable downgrade from listening to the very same tracks from ripped CDs. Both played through Roon from the same PC. Is that quality loss due to the networking components involved, or is it more likely that I'm just hearing Tidal compression?

Tidal playback is basically equivalent to local HDD playback here.

[lmitche]

Have you tried a direct connection? AKA no switch?

[lmitche]

18 minutes ago, desbiss said:

 

I am interested in hearing others' thoughts regarding what sort of a SQ improvement I could expect with the AQ-SWITCH-8 in my system... I have already taken some steps to improve my current switch, and have been impressed with the results thus far. I'm trying to legitimize the added cost for the AQ-SWITCH-8...

 

CURRENT SCENARIO: I presently have a Netgear GS108 switch with an iFi iPower PS replacing the factory wallwart... I am also already using high quality ethernet cables on the switch (Nordost for Audio purposes, and Audioquest for non-audio items). As well, I have the LAN IN on port 1, and main audio OUT to my Aurender on port 8...

 

I've read through everything I could find on the forum about the AQVOX switch, and the comments are compelling. I'm curious if anyone has transitioned from a setup like what I already have, as noted above, to the AQ-SWITCH-8... and the gains to be had. I primarily listen to Tidal, and am excited to have read many comments indicating it bears a significant improvement.

 

Thanks in advance!

Save your money, get a nice Chinese linear power supply for your switch, and don't forget to run a ground shunt from the Netgear to safety ground.  Also configure your nic for 100 mbs operation.

[lmitche]

25 minutes ago, desbiss said:

Thanks Imitche. I have noticed what I consider to be significant improvement with the optimization I have already done with my general variety Netgear Switch. And I do expect I could squeeze a bit more out of it... per your suggestions.

 

I am curious if you have experimented with any ‘audiophile’ switches? I ask as I’m trying to gain perspective on what more is potentially available with one in comparison to standard models.

 

PS - what do you mean by: configuring my nic for 100 mbs operation? I presume this means configuring my Netgear Switch, but I didn’t even realize this is possible. My switch is the main one in my house, with all other items (TV &Wifi) running off of it. I have a consistent 175 mbps service from my cable provider, and would prefer not to limit this for my non-audio devices...

 

Much appreciated!

Make sure you have a dedicated Netgear switch with only two devices plugged in to even or odd numbered ports.

 

I have not experimented with audiophile switches and don't plan to in the future.  My music is on a USB 3 drive so I don't stream anything through the network except tidal.

 

Assuming you are using a PC to play your music, you can configure the network adapter to 100 mbps which is 1/10 the normal gigabit adapter speed.  This increases sound quality immensely.

[lmitche]

5 hours ago, buonassi said:

couldn't one just use a previous gen 10/100 switch, or are there certain switches that deal with noise better than other

Yes, it would appear that some switches have more isolation than others. Measuring every switch would be impossible, but we know a few models, like the netgear Fs105 v3 and gs108 v3, that have been measured and do the job well.

 

There are numerous posts around CA on this topic including the research done by John Swenson on various switch configurations and models.

 

As to the sq of 100 vs.1000 mbps my tests are pretty definitive, 100mbps sounds best here. Nevertheless YMMV.

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, Priaptor said:

This was recommended to me.  Not sure but another thing to consider.  I have just gone the renderer route with my MSB and that part was recommended.

 

http://www.emosystems.com/product/en-70hd-ultra-compact-network-isolator/

Agreed, I have two of these network isolation transformers between my last switch and NIC.

[lmitche]

3 hours ago, Summit said:

@ Priaptor @ lmitche did the network isolation transformer make a meaningful SQ difference in your audio systems?

Yes, in the day. I've had them in for so long, that I can't remember the sound without.

 

Nevertheless continued tweaking on the network continues to yield SQ gains. I am still not done with network optimization.  I am optimistic that John Swenson's research finds the root cause of network degradation of SQ.

[lmitche]

11 hours ago, buonassi said:

 

The general consensus seems to be that going with a LAN and using a bridge/renderer is THE best it gets for pre-DAC treatment for digital audio.  

 

There is no general consensus, but rather two camps,  the two box network streaming camp, and a one box direct to DAC camp.

 

It seems that many of us started in the network streaming box camp and moved to the one direct to to DAC camp.

 

[lmitche]

18 hours ago, Solstice380 said:

 

Ya but!!  What did you have to do to get the direct up to a renderer level of SQ?  I think I’ve read about the numerous individual LT3045 regulated LPS just for the computer. And then there are the clock upgrades and clock cable effects. 

 

You’ve got as much spaghetti as I do!  ?

Yesterday I replaced the motherboard on my music server.  There are five cables connected to the PC case, two power (120 volt for the smps 12 volt to cpu, 19 volts for the hdplex 400 watt DC to DC ATX), and three USB cables (Iso Regen/DAC, HDD, and NIC).  So not too much spaghetti. There are of course more power connections for the peripheral devices, and the lt3045s are installed close to the entry point of each device so this pretty neat and tidy.

 

So yes, spaghetti for sure, but linear spaghetti, with one hub and five spokes. No that's wrong, more like rotelle!

 

 

[lmitche]

12 minutes ago, rickca said:

So what motherboard and CPU are you using now?

Same cpu, an i7-6700k with a new motherboard, an Asus Rog Strix Z270G enabling two direct to cpu slots for my USB and Optane (boot) cards. The old z170 motherboard only has a single x16 pcie slot so previously the Optane card was in a PCH connected m.2 slot.

 

There is an immediate SQ benefit. The SQ improvement is either coming from enabling the Optane card in the second direct to cpu pcie slot, or the old board was just tired, or the newer board is just a higher quality design. Actually it's probably a mix of all of the above.

 

I am thrilled with the results.