Optical Network Configurations

[dbastin]

Hi folks,

 

I have read some of the 97 pages with hope to solve my issues, however not having much luck finding solutions.

 

I would appreciate some tips.

 

As background, have a quite advanced audio network downstream of the router, and my current router is Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP which I hope to replace with CRS 305 or 106 initially to isolate the router from ethernet noise and ideally the CRS 305 will have better SQ.  Once I discover how to configure the 106 or 305 and establish if SQ improves, I hope to create a simple guide for others to follow.

 

As there is very limited audiophile routers, CRS 305 could be an attractive option if it is made easy to set up.  I am not about to shell out $1000s for Waversa Wrouter.

 

I must say RouterOS is not as easy to use as Ubiquiti so I hope to make it clear in the guide both the dollar and time/effort/head-scratching cost of moving to Mikrotik.

 

So far I have followed quick setup and explored some other relevant simple settings in RouterOS.  My CRS 305 is working insofar as I can access it directly connected to my pc and also via wifi/WAP, and use WinBox.

 

However, I have no internet connection.

 

i have not been able to upgrade the RouterOS firmware.  I have also noticed the online manual screenshots are sometimes not the same as I can see in WinBox.

 

The WAP is connected to CRS 305 via RJ45 and Cat5e.  The internet is connected via SFP1.  I use Cisco compatiblele SFPs (not SFP+) (fs.com) and SM fibre which leads from CRS 305 to a generic FMC (fs.com), which in turn is connected to the ISP connection box.  I gather SFP can work in CRS 305 SFP+ if the speed/ingress and outgress rates as the sane as the FMC (ie.1G).  Maybe I misunderstood this.

 

This arrangement works fine with the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP but not with CRS 305, so I suspect I need to tweak a setting in RouterOS.

 

Below is the settings I have in RouterOS so far.  I would appreciate tips of what I have missed or got wrong ... while I still have the patience and time due to some leave, and no inclination to go outside because it is crazy hot here.

 

Oh, the traffic on SFP1 only jumps to what is show in the image below for a moment every 15 or so seconds.

 

Cheers

Dale

[dbastin]

4 hours ago, jabbr said:

Honestly, why not leave your working router in place, let this serve IP addresses etc and use the Mikrotik as a switch using SwitchOS … multiple hops of fiber don’t add isolation. 

Thanks

 

My hypotheses are

 

Every network device is detrimentally affected by noise, which ultimately can affect sound quality.

 

Hence, isolation between devices reduces the degrading impact on SQ  of those devices.  I suspect this is partly why daisy chaining switches can improve SQ, because each extra switch reduces boise a bit more.

 

The clocking and jitter of each network device can impact SQ.

 

There is plenty of experience to support this.

 

Every network cable can degrade SQ (wired can collect noise, SFP module influence doubd).

 

Again there is plenty of experience to support this too.

 

The power supply and power cord to each network device can influence SQ.

 

And again, this has been observed by many people.

 

Every RJ45 port allows noise into the device.

 

Noise caps work here.  AqVox is oarticularly good.  Ideally, minimise the number of unused ports.

 

I can't influence what devices and clocking is outside my premises so endeavour to optimise what I can.

 

If I had another decent power supply I could try what you are suggesting.  However I would ultimately want to compare that with using CRS 305 as router, which (given the above variables) may be better than EdgeRouter > CRS 305 (as switch).

 

I suspect my config of CRS 305 as router only needs a couple of corrections to get it working ... if someone could help me with that I would be very grateful.

 

When the 305 is working, I will apply the same settings to CRS 106 to see if the SFP+ is superior to SFP.

 

I am also fortunate that my ISP is provided via fibre so intend to bypass the ISP connection box and insert ISP fibre right into my router.  Hence why I aim for a router with 2 or more SFP ports and minimal RJ45s.

 

[dbastin]

12 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Maybe you can look into iPfire SW, and something similar to this.

Then you can create a pure audio network. 

Thanks for that suggestion. I have CRS 305 and 106 so intend to test out those first.

 

9 hours ago, Jud said:

I feel you may be overthinking this. I’ve done what @jabbr suggests with a couple of CRS305s and enjoy the results a lot. It’s ISP>router>RJ45 to first 305>optical cable to second 305>optical cable to Ethernet isolation device>RJ45 to streamer>USB to USB isolation device>USB to DAC.

 

Of course if you like you can skip one or both of the isolation devices.  But as long as you’re careful about power supplies that should take care of noise on the power side, and having the optical in between should take care of any noise coming via RJ45. This allows you to take advantage of the simpler SwitchOS for the Mikrotik(s).

 

If you do want to go ahead with configuring the CRS305 as a router, then my apologies for not being able to help further, as all my web research was concentrated on getting mine to work in switch mode.

I am naturally an analyst, overthinking is normal. ;)

 

This post has turned a somewhat long story ... I have explored this stuff quite deeply into the rabbit holes.

 

My experience is that isolation between each network  device improves SQ.  By Isolation, I have tried EtherRegen, Gigafoils, and where possible fibre.  Best isolation is wifi to endpoint, by quite s margin, however it likely depends on the endpoint - mine is Devialet Pro, which I feel has better wifi performance than Auralic Aries G1 which is extremely good.  The wifi of these was better than 2 x Gigsfoils and 2 x EtherRegen in series, with $1k ethernet cables, very good LPS and $3k power cords.

 

Despite this, after replacing all those isolation things with a single wifi via Cat 5e, there were still improvements when I started putting them back in upstream of the WAP, which I put in between devices based on past experience doing that.

 

I have had $10 fibre give similar performance to $1k ethernet when it was ER > fibre > ER > $1k cable > WAP - - - endpoint. That would probably not be as similar removing WAP and plugging $1k cable into endpoint.  The wifi really diminishes the value of expensive ethernet cables because their performance is alot less obvious.

 

I have no doubt 305 (switch) > fibre > 305 (switch) is great.  I suspect:   305 (router) > fibre > ER > .. would be better. 

 

And:  ER > fibre > 305 (router ) > fibre > ER ... would be even better.

 

In my case I may end up with ...

 

ISP fibre > ISP connection box > 5cm ethernet > ER > fibre > 305 (router) > fibre > ER > $1k cable > Antipodes server > 2cm cable > WAP - - - endpoint.

 

Or 

 

ISP fibre > 305 (router ) > fibre > ER > $1k cable > Antipodes server > 5cm ethernet > ER > 2cm cable > WAP - - - endpoint.

 

My WAP is Mikrotik mAP powered by battery.  It is 100Mbps.

 

My feeling is fibre into ER is likely better than wired connection into ER in extremely revealing systems.  The assumption being there is no noise affecting the processing on Side A of the MOAT, which is most of the processing of the switch.  Further, the MOAT is good, not perfect, and I feel not as good as Gigafoil unless you open up ER and put some noise absorbing things on the MOAT (in my case, Synergistic Research ECTs) ... and/or give it an external clock.

 

So with all that background, the current EdgeRouter is performing very well however is the weakest link next upstream, my current config being ...

 

ISP fibre > ISP connection box >  Cat 5e in wall > ER > fibre > Router > $1k cable > Antipodes server > $1k cable > ER > $1k cable > WAP - - - endpoint.

 

After optimising the Router, I will optimise the italics upstream.

 

I don't mean to show off by stating $1k cable, just to highlight their calibre ... and I have been through those ranks too.

 

I hope this is informative and thought provoking.

[dbastin]

On 12/28/2021 at 2:30 AM, R1200CL said:

By this you’re only talking about fiber isolation

Yes, fibre or EtherRegen.

[dbastin]

Following on from my posts on the previous page, I managed to set up CRS 305 as a router.  The CRS 305 is clearly better than the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP it replaced.

 

I was running ...

nbn > copper > FMC (generic) > fibre > CRS 305 >copper > hifi

 

I swapped the FMC with a EtherRegen and of course gained a very worthwhile improvement.

 

The 'nbn' is a device that terminates fibre from the national broadband network and I gather is 1Gbps max.  Probably a cheap piece of hardware.  So the ER cleaned up its output a lot more than FMC.

 

If only there was a 10Gbps nbn termination device.  But I did discover a SFP+ FMC.

 

The CRS 305 was further improved by placing a Synergistic Research ECT on the switch chip (PHY).  When doing so I took thus pic.

 

The cpu is under the heatsink and it/the ocb seems firmly stuck to the base of the CRS 305 metal case, I am guessing for heat dissipation.

[dbastin]

On 2/4/2022 at 2:10 AM, jabbr said:

 

Networks can get complex, I actually use a Ubiquity router behind my fiber box (ISP) because it was getting choked doing my home networks IP6 routing and this also provides another fiirewall layer.

 

Consider using your  Mikrotik as a switch. Then again if everything is working leave it alone. There is alot to be said for making a network with as few boxes as possible.

My network is very simple.

 

The CRS 305 is fibre to RJ45 to hifi.  A 2nd fibre port from CRS 305 goes to another switch for the household network, which is presently a single wifi access point which I use to control roon.  My hifi has a 2nd WAP that is dedicated to serving the endpoint.

 

My wifi to endpoint (Devialet Pro) accounts for about half the SQ that the network hardware is providing.

 

I only add boxes if it improves sound quality.

 

I am tempted to replace the ER with a second CRS 305 or SFP+ FMC.  Or jump to Sonore OpticalModule.

 

Has anyone compared CRS 305 with Sonore OpticslModule?

[dbastin]

On 2/12/2022 at 3:55 AM, R1200CL said:

I hope you’re not talking about the EtherRegen as ER ?

If not Sonore is better than Mikrotik, and EtherRegen best. 

Yes, I meant ER = EtherRegen.  My setup is 

 

Internet > ER > fibre > CRS 305 > server ...

 

So as the, ER is presently just being FMC, it could be replaced by a 2nd SFP+ device, or Sonore Optical Module.

 

Alternatively, if ER is better than CRS 305 I could do ...

 

Internet > CRS 305 > fibre ER > server > ...

 

I suspect this option will be best.

[dbastin]

On 3/19/2022 at 11:03 PM, ted_b said:

I am somewhat of a network idiot, so I apologize if this is a simple question but:

* Thanks to @jabbr and others here I bought, a year ago or so, a Miktrotik CSS610-8g-2s switch and love it!  However, as I now build my new audio room/HT with new audio or video devices (each one seemingly with its own LAN connection) I am running out of room on my switch.  I need a few more copper LAN ports (and could use an SFP port or two but only for future, not a deal breaker now..the two SFPs I have in the switch are fine for now).  Does Mikrotik (or anyone) make an add-on, or should I not do that and instead purchase the next larger Mikrotik?  Thanks

Yes, there are plenty of switches you can add, from Mikrotik and others.

 

https://mikrotik.com/products/group/switches

 

Without knowing your network, it is hard to suggest a solution.

 

Daisy chaining switches in series is usually fine, can improve sound quality and helps to isolate the noisy household from hifi.

 

As an idea for you, I have Mikrotik CRS 305 as a router, and I run:

 

1. fibre into it from ISP (via FMC for which I am using EtherRegen because I had it)

 

2. fibre to a Ubiquiti switch for the household, most of which is via TP link wifi access point, and 

 

3. Copper to my hifi which ends at a wifi access point for wifi to my endpoint/streamer (I intend to replace the copper with fibre to a 2nd EtherRegen as my hifi switch, and still wifi to the streamer).

 

You could do similar by using the 1st CSS 610 for the household and run fibre to a 2nd switch for your hifi.

[dbastin]

10 hours ago, ted_b said:

@dbastinThanks but I've already separated hifi from rest of house, etc.  I run fiber to Fitlet2 NAA and fiber to HQP music server.   I'm simply asking how best to add copper ports from my CSS610 (audio/video room only) or just get larger Mikrotik.  Thx

Oh, I see, maybe you are not as much a network idiot as you think.  I suggest separating the HT gear from the audio gear by using the same approach as I suggested - one switch for HT, one switch for audio.  it is my experience the noise from HT gear will diminish the audio if all is using the same switch (it is still a bit of a mystery why though).  And while the network experts will say a Cat 6 UTP will be adequate to isolate the two switches from one another, I am not so sure that is a noise free connection so using fibre will remove any doubt.

[dbastin]

11 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

This is the optical network configuration thread. Optical networks do not pass noise. You can mix "HT" gear and audio gear on the same fiberoptic network without causing noise. If there is any doubt in this statement use 10 Gbe (or faster) switches but the statement applies.

 

Agreed, however he asked for more RJ45.

To clarify, I suggested using fibre to connect the audio switch to the HT switch, and fibre to connect from these to the rest of the network.  What would probably be inferior (and thus the basis for my concern) is using copper cable to connect to both HT and audio from the same switch.

 

I will add though, if it is possible to connect to any HT or audio gear using wifi instead of copper cable, that also may reduce the cable connections from passing on noise and its impact from getting into the switches being distributed to other copper connections.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I have searched through this 100 page thread and haven’t found anything that provides direct guidance on my inquiry, so I will just go ahead and ask.  Forgive me if the answers are elsewhere in the thread.

 

This is my network topography:  (1).  My xfi modem/router, my Synology NAS, my NUC, and the ultraRendu that is connected to my desktop DAC all are in my basement in proximity to one another.  (2).  The NAS and NUC are connected directly to the router with copper.  (3).  The ultraRendu is connected optically to a TrendNet FMC, which is connected by optical cable to a second TrendNet FMC, which is connected to the router by copper.  (4). The router is connected by CAT 6 to a wall plate and then by CAT 6 to the rest of the house through a 48 port Netgear switch in my garage.  (5).  The garage switch connects to my EtherRegen on the main floor by copper to the wall plate and then copper from the wall plate to the EtherRegen B side.  (6). The EtherRegen is connected to my Signature Rendu SE optically from the A side.

 

I am curious about expanding my use of optical in this network.  
 

I saw this at Amazon:  

 

https://www.amazon.com/MikroTik-Router-Gigabit-Ethernet-CRS106-1C-5S/dp/B01MZEDVCV/ref=sr_1_16?crid=296MBV2ZA2VKO&keywords=mikrotik+switch&qid=1648099943&s=electronics&sprefix=mikrotik+switch%2Celectronics%2C124&sr=1-16

 

It has 5 SFP cages plus a “combo” PoE/SFP.  It has occurred to me that I could connect this to my basement modem/router by copper and then connect the NAS, the NUC, and the ultraRendu optically to its SFP ports.  The two TrendNet FMC’s could be repurposed for the NAS and NUC and I have a Sonore Optical Module that I could repurpose for the ultraRendu.  I have a couple of spare SFP’s and some extra fiber cables that should be compatible.

 

One threshold issue is how I am going to have enough electrical outlets for all the power supplies, but I think I can work that out.  If I can, here are some specific questions that I have about this proposed setup:

 

(1).  Does this sort of configuration even make sense from a sound quality perspective for the basement ultraRendu and the living room Signature Rendu SE?  
 

The former still will have a run of copper from the Optical Module and the latter still will connect to the router over CAT 6 from router to garage switch to wall plate to EtherRegen.  With that much copper remaining in the system, I wonder how much benefit there would be from the proposed optical additions.
 

(2).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea, is this the right switch for the job?  I don’t see more than a couple of references to it on this forum, although the experts here seem to like Mikrotik products in general.  If it’s not a good solution, are there other switches with three or more SFP cages that I should consider instead?

 

(3).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea and that this is an okay switch, I wonder about powering the switch.  This is advertised as PoE capable.  However, I have neither PoE capability nor a desire to have it.  It looks from the photos, though, as though the switch instead can be powered by a 12v LPS.  Unfortunately, I can’t tell what amperage is required.  I have a 12v, 2A LPS I can dedicate to this application.  Is that likely to be a decent power source for a switch of this nature?

 

(4).  Any other potential or inevitable pitfalls of which I should be aware?  
 

Thanks for any information you can provide.

In my experience that will achieve an improvement, it may be smallish but every incremental bit adds up.

 

In terms of a switch, consider CRS 305 or another SFP+.  Further, the CRS 's can be set up as router, which is what I do - its a bit tricky but I made instructions a few pages back. I have CRS 305 and it is hands down better than the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP I had because I gather the SFP+/10G spec is better than 1Gb. 

 

I also suggest try to connect to your Signature Rendu SE directly from the new switch/router rather than via the Netgear 48 port which might be passing on noise to your audio gear from many ports.  As I see it every bit of copper cod be collecting noise, so minimise the lengths of copper in the audio part of the network and instead use fibre of wifi.

 

You might find this

ISP > copper > ER or OM > fibre > router > fibre > UR SE

better than 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > ER or OM > fibre > UR SE

 

i presume your Cat 6 is UTP, theoretically that should be better than STP.

[dbastin]

On 3/23/2022 at 4:15 AM, jabbr said:

It doesn't need to be complicated. All you need is a single optical connection from switch to the audio endpoint. The rest doesn't really matter as long as there aren't cheap wallwarts near the audio system.

That is sensible for this guy who has a fibre capable endpoint.  Also, in my experience small gains can be made from tweaking upstream of fibre.

 

On 3/23/2022 at 4:15 AM, jabbr said:

As @ted_b mentions, isolating the audio area behind a Topaz or similar isolation transformer (I use Equitech as well as Topaz), is the coup de grace on preventing external noise from entering the audio area. 

LiFePO4 batteries would be very good too.

[dbastin]

8 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks for this. I am stuck with copper in the walls as I live in a 1925-built house with lath and plaster walls and I am not having those walls opened ever again for electrical work. It was costly and a mess when I had the house rewired and cabled two years ago. I regret not running optical then, but I wasn't even aware of its existence at the time.  I could bypass the switch in the garage wall box for an individual connection to the router, but I still would be keeping the EtherRegen in the signal path because I need the conversion to optical somewhere before the rendu.  The EtherRegen seems to do a good job of minimizing upstream noise. 

 

I had a separate modem and router before xfinity lent me their xfi box, which isn't that easy to bridge, and I need wifi capability for IOT and other devices without ethernet capability.  I have ubiquiti access points on each floor but a couple of devices either need or prefer a wifi connection at the router. A simple switch makes more sense to me than dealing with a replacement router, not that the xfi router doesn't have the weirdest gui ever developed for a router. 

Hmm, in that case I suggest ...

 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > CRS SFP+/10G switch > copper > ER > fibre > SR SE

 

Also connect NAS, NUC and ultrarendu to the new switch.

 

Here in Australia there is no need for a modem, the ISP comes via a national broadband network (nbn) to a proprietary connection box (I assume it is like a modem) into which the router connects.  In my case it actually looks like this, with the italics outside my control ...

 

exchange > fibre > nbn box > copper > ER > 10m fibre > CRS SFP+ router > copper > server built in switch > copper > wifi > endpoint.

 

The ER rocks where I have it.  What is puzzling is that I can detect when I change the copper from nbn box to ER .. even with fibre, ERs MOAT and wifi in the series.  It is small but not hard to hear.  Go figure!?

[dbastin]

31 minutes ago, Mike Rubin said:

This is what I visualized in my post, except that I proposed using the inexpensive CRS 106 rather than the CRS 305.  Not sure that I can see a functionality difference between the two Mikrotik products beyond the 305 being bootable into a switch OS, which seems more bespoke than the router OS for my use case….Do you know how these products differ?

I am really just following observations made by many others here on this thread about the benefits of SFP+/10G v SFP/1G.  The difference is not about comparing their functionality.  In short, and I am sure others can explain better, the specifications for the SFP+/10G is much higher standards which also happens to benefit audio (think clock quality, jitter, noise, etc).

 

I was using Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP (1G), which by all accounts is quite good benefits for audio use, and did a straight swap to install the CRS 305 in its place.  Cold, with say only an hour of prior use while I configured it, the improvement was far in excess of the price difference.  I have spent lots more on other ethernet things that made much less difference.  For instance, adding the ER upstream instead of a generic FMC, or downstream for that matter, in my situation made much less difference.

 

Others here are using other CRS with copper and SFP+ ports.  It is no coincidence that AfterDark and others consider industrial grade SFP+ modules to sound best.

[dbastin]

33 minutes ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks.  I was just planning on reusing old SFP modules if I went this route, but it sounds as though I need to invest in SFP+ to get the best from it.  Down another wallet-emptying rathole. :)

I gather from my reading that in many cases SFP can be used in SFP+.  I am just using SFP modules, so far.  Actually I have speed turned down to 100Mbps, it ocassionally stalls so may need to increase that to eliminate interruptions.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, Quokka_61 said:

MikroTik CRS305-1G-4S+ switch, and it is my understanding that its 1G ethernet port is for management purposes only.

On my CRS 305 using RouterOS the RJ45 jack works as a regular ethernet connection.

 

2 hours ago, Johnnydev said:

i have exact the same experiences overhere!

Good to know I am not just hearing imaginary tnings.

 

2 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I have plain-Jane TrendNet FMC’s that I was going to reuse in this application but they are SFP, not SFP+, and only 1 gb.  Are there comparable 10gb FMC’s that can use SFP+ modules?

I gave up search, the rare one's I found cost more than CRS 305.  I gather it is possible to use 1G FMCs connected to a 10G switch, there are settings for that.

 

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

I really don’t think so. There is no unified reports that SFP+ sounds better. We have a possible theory that it may do, cause of certain eye pattern testing proves better phase noise. But I think it’s more complex than that. 

No need to purchase expensive SFP+ modules. And you will also face other issues, as you have to make sure they are working in 1 GHz  as intended with the 1421 module. (Yes, the 1375 normally do). 
 

There are reports that some SFP modules sounds different from others. Especially MM vs SM. Others has different laser technologies. 

Check out what AfterDark Audio) (threads on AS and their website)  and Taiko and its user have to say .. try whatsbestforum.

[dbastin]

27 minutes ago, Quokka_61 said:

 

In that case, my apologies for disseminating erroneous information.

 

@dbastin If I may ask, did the RJ45 port work for you right from the start, or did you need to change settings in RouterOS? Like I wrote, when I connected the ethernet port of my CRS305 to a ditto port of another switch, no connection was established. After reading in the manual that the RJ45 port of the MikroTik was meant for switch management, my conclusion was that no normal switch-to-switch traffic over this port was possible. Reading it is, is good news, and so I have some more troubleshooting to do this weekend to have this port work for me as well.

Out of the box was RouterOS.  It was some time ago so I am not sure if I changed something to achieve it and don't recall all the settings I changed.

 

I have avoided looking at RouterOS ever since.  But when I get some patience I will go in to change the speed at the risk of clumsily stuffing something else up. 

 

Edit

My post on page 97 has photos of settings that might be a clue ... ports and interfaces could be the solution, and I recall sometimes 2 settings are needed to change what naively seems one thing.

[dbastin]

17 hours ago, sandston said:

dBastin

Am I reading your post correctly? Are you saying you felt you achieved better sound by adding a Microtik 305 upstream of your Etheregen than daisy chaining two Etheregens? Based on cost and of course availability of the Etheregen I am certain I am not alone in want ting to hear more. Can any other members share similar 305 experience?

 

My short answer is Yes, but best to understand the explanation.

 

The CRS 305 is my router.  This is a key point.  My former ISP router was a weak link improved upon by replacing with EdgeRouter X SFP, and again replacing that with CRS 305.

 

So it is not swapping out an ER switch with SFP+ switch.  However the CRS 305 really starts to question if 2 ERs is good value.

 

There is critical context that reduces the impact of all things un my network.  That is wifi to my endpoint is far far superior to wired, it replaced 2 x ERs + Gigafoil with US$1k ethernet cables.  But, the isolation of the 2 most downstream of these may have been a bit compromised as they were powered via 2 modules of a Wyred4sound PS1.  For reference, this wifi is at least as good as the very impressive wifi of Auralic Aries G1.

 

In this context, this is what I have tried (take a deep breath) in order from least to most recent. I will underline what changed in each case:

 

nbn/ISP > lots of Cat5e UTP > Synergistic Research Atmos X Ref > ER1 > 2m fibre > Edgerouter X SPP > JCAT Signature > Antipodes EX (ie. server with built in switch) > Shunyata Sigma > ER2 > Synergistic Atmos X Ref > wifi access  point (Mikrotik mAP lite)> --wifi-- > Devailet pro.

 

nbn > lots of Cat5e > Synergistic Atmos X Ref > ER1 > 2m fibre > CRS 305 > JCAT Signature > Antipodes EX (server) > Shunyata Sigma > ER2 > Atmos X Ref > WAP > --wifi-- > Devailet pro.

 

nbn > 50cm Cat5e > FMC > 10m fibre > CRS 305 > 2m fibre > ER1 > Atmos X Ref > Antipodes EX > Sigma > ER2 > Atmos X Ref > WAP > --wifi-- > Devailet pro.

 

nbn > Wireworld Platinum > FMC > fibre (10m)> CRS 305 > Synergistic Research Atmos X Ref > Antipodes EX > Synergistic Research Atmos X Ref > WAP

 

nbn > Wireworld Platinum > ER Side B - Side A > fibre (10m)> CRS 305 > Synergistic Research Atmos X Ref > Antipodes EX > Synergistic Research Atmos X Ref > WAP

This was definitely worthwhile.

 

This is where I have landed so far ...

 

nbn > Wireworld Platinun > ER Side B - Side A > fibre (10m)> CRS 305 > JCat Signature > Antipodes EX > Shnyata Sigma > WAP

 

Every change was different and generally quite small improvement (ie. In view of pro and cons of each change).  But by the time I landed at the end, it was becoming small-moderate.

 

The Synergistic Research Atmosphere X Reference a great cable, enhanced when grounded especially with HD ground wire to Active Ground Block SE.   My feeling is it carries a faithful signal, noise and all. I actually prefer its sound, but ... the Jcat and Shunyata filter noise.  They are just different, doing different things and so suit different situations.

 

I tried not touch or change anything not underlined.

 

In all cases I use LPS but change them around a bit. 

 

On the nbn > xxx > FMC I tried generic Cat 6 STP, AfterDark Cat 7, and Wireworld Platinum Cat 8.  With both FMC and ER the differences are quite small, but still enough to compare. 

 

Now trying good quality Cat 6a UTP in different locations in case UTP happens to trump what I have.

 

Then will try ..

 

nbn > Wireworld Platinun > ER Side B - Side A > fibre (10m)> CRS 305 > fibre > ER >

Side A >  JCat Signature > Antipodes EX

Side B > Shnyata Sigma > WAP

 

I hope this is helpful.

[dbastin]

6 hours ago, mantis07 said:

@dbastinwhat is your WAP?

 

thx

tony

 

I was first using a TP Link which, even with metres of Cat5e, was superior to all that wired stuff.  I then worked on optimising the wifi and got this ...

9 hours ago, dbastin said:

Mikrotik mAP lite

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

 

It is powered by a USB power bank by a very short cable, one of these detoxers connected to the battery via very short USB C to A cable ...

 

http://www.myhifishop.de/Accessories/AQVOX-USB-Detoxer-QL2-USB-A-Terminator-power-cleaner-jitter-ex::82.html

 

I got this detoxer for something else but then tried on the WAP and left it there.  It is possible Akiko is better.

 

The mAP and battery now have no unused ports and sits on a Synergistic Research Tranquillity POD 20cm from the endpoint antenna and only the endpoint has access to mAP (I have another WAP for control access).

[dbastin]

12 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

I agree with what you say, but there is no specific correlation to the "clock" in the network switch and the performance of the switch. Dumbing the discussion down to simply looking at clock specification is fine for audiophile forums with members that don't have the bandwidth to understand the complexity but let me give a different perspective:

 

The 10Gbe capable switch is better because it, when compliant, is tested against the vastly more rigorous 10Gbe specification. The clock chip is only part of the equation.

 

The 10Gbe specification requires compliance testing which includes not only eye-pattern but **stressed eye-pattern** which means you throw the most jitter allowed into one end, and measure the other end: the specification requires that you reject the jitter

 

Its easy to use marketing spec to talk about fancy clock chips -- and we all know that these clocks are dirt cheap anyways -- but modern network devices (and I mean 10Gbe+) have actual circuits to reject upstream jitter. Those might be put into a 1Gbe switch but the proof is in the pudding: show me the stressed eye pattern testing: I've never seen the results of this test from any of the so-called audiophile network switches.

 

We are also at the stage where the newest DACs have exceeded the necessary bandwidth of these old legacy network devices and processors e.g. the Holo May DAC which can do DSD2048 and PCM 3.072Mhz

 

The point is that the Mikrotik being a 10Gbe switch claims to pass the stressed eye pattern test i.e. to actually reject upstream jitter.

Love your work!  Now I am wondering if there is a certification or something that proves a product passed the required tests and meets the spec for 10Gb/SFP+?

 

While not strictly about optical, I got wondering if the Wifi 6 products that claim 10Gb are compliant with these or equivalent specs.  I stuck my foot down that rabbit hole and discovered it could be hard to find a WAP that has 10GB or SFP+ input rather than just 10G and several GB throughput.

 

Alternatively, wifi routers with SFP+ and/or 10GB RJ45 are starting to appear on the market, eg.

https://www.asus.com/au/Networking-IoT-Servers/WiFi-Routers/ASUS-Gaming-Routers/RT-AX89X/

 

I am skeptical about putting all that busy radio stuff in the same enclosure as the router circuits, it might spoil the benefits.

 

12 hours ago, jabbr said:

Yeah I think we should generally get away from the idea that a network device should have an SQ. Audio equipment has SQ. A network device should send bits without noise. It shouldn't have a sound. It should sound completely "black". If a network device has a sound that implies that it is transmitting noise along with the bits.

Agreed.  However that is the ideal that seems rarely achieved.

Black is certainly one quality of low noise, I feel distortion (or lack of it) is also a tell tale of low noise/low impact network.  I find these good ways to hear (or not) distortions:  pure female soprano voices, flutes, piccolo, glockenspiel, triangle, chimes, tubular bells.  These have clean, pure character with minimal overtones rather than character that can mask distortion (eg. reed in sax, strings with bows, resonating bodies, etc).

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

I suggest you have a look at IPFire. Then you can build your own router with required SFP’s. 
 

This is also an excellent way to build a physical separated audio network. 

 

But will it satisfy the stringent SFP+ requirements?

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

Yes, as long as you find required HW available. 

I appreciate your contribution, however I am rather puzzled why in this thread about optical hardware, where presently there is discussion of SFP+ hardware design to meet particular specifications, you suggest a software solution that depends on hardware to meet that specification without also suggesting the hardware that will do this.  I suspect that SFP+ is quite unique to network hardware and probably not even addressed in generic hardware like mini PC, Raspberry Pi.  My server is Antipodes, not a modded PC.

 

Also, how would this be any more separate than a router connected to the ISP via fibre?

 

I would appreciate more info to encourage me to look down this rabbit hole ... there are many others.

[dbastin]

On 3/31/2022 at 4:08 AM, jabbr said:

Is there a 10Gbe+ fiber ethernet switch in existence which accepts an external clock?

This is a candidate I recently noticed... https://www.adark.co/en-au/collections/project-giesemann-ocxo/products/mikrotik-crs112-cloud-router-switch-x-giesemann-ocxo-white-armor-edition

 

 

 

[dbastin]

7 hours ago, jabbr said:

That's very obviously a 1Gbe switch, I asked about 10Gbe/25Gbe.

Oops, so sorry, I took one look and assumed it was the similar looking CSS610-8G-2S+IN.

However, sub in the CSS610-8G-2S+IN and you have a solution.  I'd guess it is only a matter of time before Afterdark do so, Adrian seems to have realised SFP+ given he sells this ...

https://www.adark.co/en-au/collections/audiophile-grade-networking-system/products/netgear-nightawk-xr700-audiophile-sfp-router-x-afterdark-black-modernize-linear-power-supply-high-current-edition

[dbastin]

13 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

He can realise whatever but unless whomever does compliance testing then its not 10Gbe compliant (if anyone cares). I have never seen a single shred of evidence that neither can an external clock properly supply a 10Gbe device, nor does it provide any shred of improvement in noise or jitter ie the eye pattern, nor improve jitter rejection ie the stressed receiver test, nor is there a shred of evidence that this affects the audio signal.

Now I am puzzled why you asked if there is a 10Gb switch that accepts an external clock.