Router and Ethernet Switch suggestions

[Al Jones]

WHY would you spend $400 Euro when you could spend WAY less and go fiber, and even less and go Wireless.

 

This makes no sense.

 

I have experimented with these things continuously since I went from CD playback to a Slim Devices Transporter 10 years ago.

 

At no time since then have I ever found wireless anywhere near acceptable in terms of stability or SQ.

 

A few months ago, I invested in TP-Link fiberoptics, based on high praise here and elsewhere. It didn't take long to discover that the SQ was markedly inferior to wire.

 

I have had positive experiences with the Aqvox 5V wall wart and USB cables, so after the Hifi Statement review, I decided to take a chance. The switch appears to build on Paul Pang's work and I have had great results with several of his products.

[Cornan]

I have experimented with these things continuously since I went from CD playback to a Slim Devices Transporter 10 years ago.

 

At no time since then have I ever found wireless anywhere near acceptable in terms of stability or SQ.

 

A few months ago, I invested in TP-Link fiberoptics, based on high praise here and elsewhere. It didn't take long to discover that the SQ was markedly inferior to wire.

 

I have had positive experiences with the Aqvox 5V wall wart and USB cables, so after the Hifi Statement review, I decided to take a chance. The switch appears to build on Paul Pang's work and I have had great results with several of his products.

When you get that Aqvox switch-8 please report back with your impressions. I am very interested!

Do not forget to ground it to your Entreq grounding box. I just tried my simple battery powered D-Link DSG-105 switch grounded to my Entreq Minimus and was truly amazed by the result. The best spot for the Minimus in my setup up to date! ?

Oh, one more thing. Try it with input on socket 1 and output on socket 8. Sounds best IMO, and my guess it is partly due to the QoS feature of D-Link.

[R1200CL]

Yes, it is a modified D-Link. They make no secret of that. See review HIFISTATEMENT | netmagazine - AQVOX AQ-SWITCH-8

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]33551[/ATTACH]

 

Will you also test it with a LPS-1 ?

 

Actually they (actually it is Susanne a one woman's company) state using other PS will degrade the SQ

[Al Jones]

I noticed their claim that "The enclosed power supply is optimally matched to the High-End Switch. Other, supposedly better power supplies, including The AQVOX Low-Noise power supply have a deteriorating effect on the sound."

 

It will be interesting to see whether putting an LPS-1 in earlier in the signal path will be beneficial.

[Cebolla]

It will be interesting to see whether putting an LPS-1 in earlier in the signal path will be beneficial.

Be very careful when mentioning the digital audio signal path and network involvement, as it depends entirely on the mechanism you are using and may give others the wrong idea.

 

For example, in network audio file streaming setups such as with the Logitech/Slim Devices Transporter network audio file player/streamer you mentioned earlier, the signal path is most definitely not passing through the network. The realtime digital audio signal which gets passed to the DAC, is actually produced by the streamer with it decoding and playing the audio files received from the media server, so after the network!

[JohnSwenson]

Be very careful when mentioning the digital audio signal path and network involvement, as it depends entirely on the mechanism you are using and may give others the wrong idea.

 

For example, in network audio file streaming setups such as with the Logitech/Slim Devices Transporter network audio file player/streamer you mentioned earlier, the signal path is most definitely not passing through the network. The realtime digital audio signal which gets passed to the DAC, is actually produced by the streamer with it decoding and playing the audio files received from the media server, so after the network!

 

In a squeeze system the files are NOT sent to the player, the server reads the files and sends the data over the network using a protocol called slimproto to the player. The actual player part just listens on a particular port for slimproto packets, extracts the data and sends it to the DAC chip(s). There are some large buffers along the way (several seconds worth) to deal with network dropouts.

 

John S.

[Cebolla]

I stand corrected, John. I thought SlimProto was just a method of packetising the audio files for the network and the audo file data still needs to be decoded using the appropriate audio codec by the receiving squeeze player.

[R1200CL]

I suggest everyone living outside EU should email Aqvox and request her to deduct the 19% mwst (vat). At the moment she think it's to much work.

I think if she gets 50 emails she may reconsider. It's some paperwork the first tIme, but when she know the drill, it shouldn't be an argument against her customers.

Also people may purchase other items from her as well.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[Albrecht]

I suggest everyone living outside EU should email Aqvox and request her to deduct the 19% mwst (vat). At the moment she think it's to much work.

I think if she gets 50 emails she may reconsider. It's some paperwork the first tIme, but when she know the drill, it shouldn't be an argument against her customers.

Also people may purchase other items from her as well.

Computer Audiophile

Wow so an additional 19% on top of the already steep, (heavily politicized), Euro exchange rate?

 

Not worth it for me....

[R1200CL]

Wow so an additional 19% on top of the already steep, (heavily politicized), Euro exchange rate?

 

Not worth it for me....

 

Deducted from €398.

 

You should pay €335

 

And if you prefer iFi power instead, or the LPS-1, you can deduct more. I think the smps is listed €85.

 

Then the price may be €261 without mwst.

 

+ freight.

[Albrecht]

Deducted from €398.

ou should pay €335

 

And if you prefer iFi power instead, or the LPS-1, you can deduct more. I think the smps is listed €85.

 

Then the price may be €261 without mwst.

+ freight.

My bad... much more reasonable.. thought that those numbers were additions: guess i was expecting the worst....

 

:-)

[plissken]

and my guess it is partly due to the QoS feature of D-Link.

 

Since QOS is a traffic prioritization method, and it sound's like it comes pre-configured, how can someone know what type of traffic QOS is enabled for? How does the manufacturer know what protocols and services you are using so they can configure QOS?

 

You would be better off with a layer three managed switch, and setup your audio playback chain in its own VLAN where no other traffic makes it from other non-music devices instead of attempting to QOS your entire environment.

[Cornan]

Since QOS is a traffic prioritization method, and it sound's like it comes pre-configured, how can someone know what type of traffic QOS is enabled for? How does the manufacturer know what protocols and services you are using so they can configure QOS?

 

You would be better off with a layer three managed switch, and setup your audio playback chain in its own VLAN where no other traffic makes it from other non-music devices instead of attempting to QOS your entire environment.

 

They don´t! QoS on D-link switches just have the highest priority on the last 2 ports. Soundwise it is actually a big difference with my 5 port switch using port 2 vs 5 as output. If this is due to QoS is as I wrote just a guess...but it is a fact that it sounds better on the last port using Tidal as source. Go figure!

[plissken]

They don´t! QoS on D-link switches just have the highest priority on the last 2 ports. Soundwise it is actually a big difference with my 5 port switch using port 2 vs 5 as output. If this is due to QoS is as I wrote just a guess...but it is a fact that it sounds better on the last port using Tidal as source. Go figure!

 

Why not get a $100 switch and enable QoS then? I hope you see the point I'm trying to make.

 

If QOS sounds better, then VLAN's are going to go one step further since you have established a smaller broadcast domain in addition to not having to have the Switches CPU engaged for traffic shaping and prioritization.

 

VLANs are almost CPU load neutral while QOS isn't and the CPU in the Dlink isn't anything to write home about.

[Cornan]

Why not get a $100 switch and enable QoS then? I hope you see the point I'm trying to make.

 

If QOS sounds better, then VLAN's are going to go one step further since you have established a smaller broadcast domain in addition to not having to have the Switches CPU engaged for traffic shaping and prioritization.

 

VLANs are almost CPU load neutral while QOS isn't and the CPU in the Dlink isn't anything to write home about.

Thanks pilissken! I will check out those VLANs. Any pointer were to start that journey? Will they work with Aries Mini?

 

I am over the moon with externally grounded and battery powered D-Link switch, Cat 6A U/UTP cables, router with galvanicly isolated linear PSU and TP Link RE450 (wireless adapter) connected to a isolation transformer with floating secondary. Sounds much better than a battery powered FMC chain. If you mean that VLAN could top this up I am all ears! ?

[plissken]

Thanks pilissken! I will check out those VLANs. Any pointer were to start that journey? Will they work with Aries Mini?

 

I am over the moon with externally grounded and battery powered D-Link switch, Cat 6A U/UTP cables, router with galvanicly isolated linear PSU and TP Link RE450 (wireless adapter) connected to a isolation transformer with floating secondary. Sounds much better than a battery powered FMC chain. If you mean that VLAN could top this up I am all ears! ��

 

I'm not saying VLANs can top it. What I'm saying is someone that is selling an 'Audiophile grade switch' and touting QOS when Vlans are advantageous and readily available most likely doesn't know what they are talking about.

 

The reason I say this is because QOS is generally a tic mark. Vlans take some understanding to implement but they have all the advantages I've listed of a dedicated broadcast domain and minimal CPU overhead.

 

Take a managed switch and create a VLAN with 192.168.1.64/28 (255.255.255.240) bit sub-net mask would give you a broadcast domain only 16 hosts big. So the audio only portion is 192.168.1.65-78 (64 is your base network and 79 is your broadcast address).

 

Create another VLAN with 192.168.1.0/26 (255.255.255.192) with 1-62 usable. 0 is your base network and 63 is your broadcast.

 

A good router will need to support static routing. Just double check in case. Anything going on in the 192.168.1.0 network (broadcasts, chatty protocols, etc...) are stopped at the boundary of the VLAN unless you have SPECIFICALLY setup a route between them.

 

As an example: Had a business call me up with a failing POS system (basically slowed to a crawl). They were blaming the POS vendor and the vendor checked things on their end and everything was fine. Then I noticed that the diagnostic light was going solid amber at different points.

 

I would reset the router and things would be ok and then back to random lock ups. I turned on sys logging and the network was getting saturated with broadcast traffic from the DVR system. So I unplug the DVR Ethernet, I log into the switch, create a /29 and two /28 networks. Put the POS system into one of the /28's, put the DVR into another /28, and put everything else into the /29 and setup routes from the good /28 and the good /29 into the router.

 

So now I have everything up and running, I plug the DVR into the 2nd /28 and the router is stable even though the DVR is still problematic. Long story short is that the DVR had been hacked and turned into a Zombie, it was effectively doing a Denial of Service by hitting the router. My subnetting the switch and killing the route for the 2nd /28 meant the router wasn't having to respond to the broadcast and I could effectively port mirror and troubleshoot while the rest of the network functioned @ full wire speed. QOS wouldn't have helped.

[Cornan]

Thanks @pilissken for that detailed info regarding VLANs. I have setup my TP Link RE450 (as wireless adapter) with 5ghz only, static IP and DHCP off. It is only communicating with the D-Link unmanaged switch via short Cat 6a U/UTP cables (50+30cm). Is this completely different to VLAN? I am not a network guru. I just know that this approach sounds awesome, even though the galvanicly isolated ac mains connections to all network devices was the real brake through.

[plissken]

Thanks @pilissken for that detailed info regarding VLANs. I have setup my TP Link RE450 (as wireless adapter) with 5ghz only, static IP and DHCP off. It is only communicating with the D-Link unmanaged switch via short Cat 6a U/UTP cables (50+30cm). Is this completely different to VLAN? I am not a network guru. I just know that this approach sounds awesome, even though the galvanicly isolated ac mains connections to all network devices was the real brake through.

 

Your switch is unmanaged and therefore most likely incapable of doing VLAN. Your router may be able to do VLAN. Is your RE450 your Internet router?

[Cornan]

Your switch is unmanaged and therefore most likely incapable of doing VLAN. Your router may be able to do VLAN. Is your RE450 your Internet router?

No, I have a Netgear CG3700EMR router (service providers choise) which is communicating via wireless ac (5Ghz only) to the TP Link 1750AC RE450 wireless extender (in wireless adapter mode). Cat6a U/UTP cables to D-Link DSG-105 to Auralic Aries Mini.

[GUTB]

Lol, what does VLANs have to with anything? In fact, wouldn't that just make a switch work harder to run a routing table?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

No, I have a Netgear CG3700EMR router (service providers choise) which is communicating via wireless ac (5Ghz only) to the TP Link 1750AC RE450 wireless extender (in wireless adapter mode). Cat6a U/UTP cables to D-Link DSG-105 to Auralic Aries Mini.

 

I searched the PDF for the 3700 and it doesn't mention VLAN.

[plissken]

Lol, what does VLANs have to with anything? In fact, wouldn't that just make a switch work harder to run a routing table?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Actually no. Compared to QoS, Vlans present almost no load for the router. The switch doesn't do any extra work what so ever. You do IVR on the router.

 

Additionally VLANs do some things you don't get with QoS. That is traffic from other subnets can't make it over unless routed there. It provides a significant level of isolation include the ability to apply Access Control Lists. So you can even firewall the Vlan.

[Cornan]

I searched the PDF for the 3700 and it doesn't mention VLAN.

A pity! It would have been a fun experiment. You'll never know what might come out of it, even not everyone would agree...and I tend to like bad odds experiments! ? Anyway, I am extremely happy with the D-Link approach (input port1/output port 5) right now, but might pull the plug on the Aqvox switch-8 if it turns out truly great for other members.

Thanks for educating me in something that was fairly unknown to me (heard about it before though, but never took notice of it)! ?

[ferenc]

This is an interesting, really professional unit, for pro audio and all sorts of live AV events. The Neutrik Ethercon connectors properly shielded and it has a IEC mains connector so you can use shielded power cables with proper grounding if you want at least experimenting with all kind of power cables. Metal housing too. Low jitter mentioned as a feature however it is not an audio jitter I bet.

 

Luminex > products

 

All sorts of configuration possibilities of course.

 

It is not really cheap unfortunately. Hope to try it sometime soon.

[pl_svn]

pulled this morning my trusty, good, old 10/100 PaulPang switch from the chain

was good 'till I only had a NAS and Mac mini plugged into it but since I started using Roon and an Aries as endpoint... it wasn't holding up anymore

 

replaced, for the moment, with a plain vanilla Netgear GS105E gigabit but, even though I'm powering it from a good LPS (as everything else)... must confess I'm feeling "a bit nervous" LOL!

so while leaving everything the way it is... I'm looking around

 

Paul Pang now makes a gigabit switch and I've also seen this one by Jcat which looks the same as the AQVox

re the Jcat vs AQVox it's not about price, just... so far my "don't buy from companies which go a long length about describing how their stuff does sound but say almost nothing about how it is made and why" has always proven right and both AQVox and Jcat's "technical description" look exactly the same

 

Paul Pang too now says quite a little about his mods plus... the switch he is using looks an old and discontinued model

 

oh, and... all of the above are 8 ports but 5 is more than enough for my needs (and available space)

more ideas/suggestions?