Optical Network Configurations

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, Bertel said:

 

I can't tell a difference, but I don't listen to / compare network components anyway. It sure sounded awesome before and sounds awesome now 😉

Well, that is a lot better than people who can't theirs to working get ... silence.

[dbastin]

10 hours ago, jabbr said:

@Bertel has given very specific instructions to get it working. Did you follow exactly?

Thanks for your query.

 

it was @89reksal who gave the excellent instructions, but he showed him self out of this after probably feeling unwelcome due to it being implied he was acting 'entitled'.  I'd say his frustration was misinterpreted ... but we all interpret differently.

 

For example, my comment Well, that is a lot better than people who can't theirs to working get ... silence. was humor, Yoda style.

 

At this point I don't have SFP+ or above modules and trying to gleen which are actually compatible, and of those which sound best, and how to configure RouterOS to suit.

 

SFP28/QSFP28 now seems to solve the compatibility ...  but now wondering if it sounds better than Industrial grade Finisar 1G or 10G.

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

How have you determined that you have achieved this "blackness"?

Very good question!  A point of reference is necessary but very hard to establish.  I'd say there are a few things that contribute to reducing noise floor and creating noiseless  blackness, and one cant really judge the impact of ethernet noise reduction unless all those other sources of noise have been reduced at least equally and ideally more.   For instance, the difference between one switch and another might not be as distinct if there is high degrees of AC noise polluting the system.

 

The obvious noise sources are AC power, grounding, cabling.  And then there is more abstract sources dealt with by things like Telos Macro G and Q, Synergistic Research ECTs and Tranquillity PODs and Bases, Input caps, Akiko tuning sticks, Bybee, Lessloss Speaker firewall, etc.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

Some of these noise sources may be so abstract as to be nonexistent.

I use all those I listed except the Lessloss firewall (which you can read reviews about). In my experience each does 'something' which contribute's to improving sound quality.  For example my CRS 305 has an ECT on the switch chip, is grounded via HD ground cable to a Synergistic Research Active Ground Block SE, and sits on a Tranquility POD.  It didn't take me long to recognise the benefit of each of these - despite the 10G specs.

 

3 hours ago, jabbr said:

I’m not looking for my network to have an SQ, rather no sound.

Agreed, however I am not certain what zero coloration or impact from ethernet will sound like, if it is actually possible!

 

A Devialet Pro is my endpoint, connected via wifi to a battery powered low power WAP (so completely floating from the network).  But still, changes upstream are detectable, even upstream of the CRS 305.

 

I even hear improvements from most roon updates, such as the one installed a few hrs ago.

[dbastin]

19 hours ago, R1200CL said:

This is Microtik answer:

 

Hello,

The CSS610 do not support setting Rate Select (RS0) signal to the Low state.
Unfortunately, we cannot make 1G support in CSS610 for 1G/10G SFP+ modules which firmware strictly follows that.
All MikroTik SFP+ modules also support 1G/10G speeds and work in both speeds in the CSS610, we can only suggest using them instead.

Sorry for inconvenience.

Regards,
Jānis B.

Do you happen to know if that is the case with all Mikrotik SwOS or just that switch?

 

And does the same limitatiin apply with RouterOS?

 

I am using CRS 305 with RouterOS.

[dbastin]

10 hours ago, sandston said:

I'm so confused by this Melco cable. Doesn't the use of copper wire negate the whole point of why we are using optical? Every day this hobby leaves me feeling like John Snow.

It's a DAC cable, not optical.  It is a puzzling approach, there will be no galvanic isolation, and there is no mention of cable sheild or grounding.  Perhaps it has thpese technical shortcomings unless the sender and/or receiver are designed to overcome them (maybe that is what Taiko has done) to allow the advantages to prevail.

 

I am curious how DAC is superior to RJ45, DELA inplies RJ45 has 'conversion overhead' that SFP doesn't.  I suppose that couid be because the 'conversion' is usually done by the SFP module to convert from light to electiricity and with a DAC that is eliminated (unnecessary), whereas with RJ45 the converting (i'm not sure if or what converting happens) is done by the sender and receiver (not a seperate module).

 

I'd say the ethernet signal being sent down a DAC would be proneto passing in noise compared to a RJ45 wire with galvanic isolation and using shield to deflect and drain noise.

My 2c ...

[dbastin]

5 hours ago, audiobomber said:

I am totally skeptical that a consumer grade 10g switch can compare with a product designed for audio, like the ER

Just for interest, I recently swapped the order from

ER > fibre > CRS 305 to

CRS 305 > fibre > ER

 

Nothing else was changed.  CRS 305 is my router.  No wired ethernet is connected to it except WAN via Synergistic Research Atmosphere X Reference which has the sheil disconnected at tge downstream end, and connected to ground.  Upstream is a mandatory national broadband network termination device (eg like a modem). Downstream is Antipodes CX Oladra.

 

The difference in sound is not so obvious a novice would immediately notice.  It took me a while get a fix on the difference, some of that was probably 'clock' type things getting back towards optimal.  Refinement is a great descriptor - in that sense ER Is 'better'.

 

Both the ER and CRS 305 sit on Synergistic Research Tranquility POD (original) which in my view have a greater impact than the difference between ER and CRS 305 -the difference may have been greater without the PODs.  I'd guess the CRS 305 with a POD is really quite competitive with ER without a POD.

 

I consider PODs are really worthwhile addition to the network and CX which has a new Carbon version which 'conditions' my battery powered WAP wifi connection to Devialet.  I focus the PODs on network devices that are not available in 'audiophile' products where I moved them to after they were replaced by Tranquility Bases used with other components.

[dbastin]

21 hours ago, audiobomber said:

What power supplies do you use on the switches? Which SFP's are you using?

The SFPs are Cisco 1G from Afterdark which have some sort of tape on them.  I intend to change those when I have time to re-read what works between 10G CRS 305 and 1G ER - as I recall we either use 1G both ends (and tse the 'best' 1G sounding, eg. Cisco AOC) or shell out heaps for SFP28 to autonegotiate the ER end to 1G.

 

The LPSs are W4S PS1 at downstream end (which is powered via dedicated line, Synergistic Research (SR) Powercell SE and Atmosphere and Galileo SX power cords).  The upstream end is Antipodes ODAPS with fairly basic Furutech power cord into a wall outlet on a general household circuit.  The downstream device also has a SR DC SX cable.

 

Some of the benefits of this arrangement is that the devices either end of fibre are on totally seperate power lines.

[dbastin]

15 minutes ago, jabbr said:

A big advantage of fiber is that you can use noisy servers in noisy server rooms (my basement) on one power line and transmit clean signal to clean power in your listening area

Unfortunately my recent experience demonstrated that to be an incorrect assumption in my case.  I made several changes to the upstream fibre device (which was initially ER) and to the device upstream of that and I couid notice a difference with every change.  Actually, the changes I made have together gained so much improvements it is the most beneficial expenditure I have made on any part I my hifi system in quite a long time when comparing with other similar expenditures.

 

More interesting than that surprising discovery is that I also use wifi to connect to my endpoint (Devialet Pro), so the recent changes have translated to being audible despite fibre and wifi isolation.

 

In short the changes were installing Synergistic Research Tranquility PODs and MIG 2, Ground wires and ground block, a better shelf and Furutech AC.

 

So the general tip from this is it might pay to experiment to test assumptions.

 

37 minutes ago, jabbr said:

I'm not sure there is a need for folks to "shell out heaps for SFP28" modules because you'll also need a 25G switch.

I thought I read in this thread (or the EtherRegen thread) the SFP28 can auto-negotiate speed to work in 1G and 10G devices. It was a way to work around the constraint that ER needs a 1G SFP module even when using a 10G switch like CRS 305 with 10G modules at tgat end..  Maybe my recollection is wrong or what I read is.

[dbastin]

9 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

The SFP28 autonegotiation is for an SFP28 capable switch with an SFP28 module ... so yes it autonegotiates but at a cost

Thanks, I thought I had read SFP28 can autonegotiate in the ER 1G SFP cage.  That is where it would be udeal to put the best SQ SFP module but ER might accept only 1G, apparently it won't work with 10G modules but I can't recall if dual rate 1/10G modules work.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, SQFIRST said:

 

 

@jabbr thank you for your thoughts on that. It makes sense. Combined with the post from @barrows I should clarify how I am using 10G and my experience of the subsequent benefits.

My last audio segment to the Lumin X1 is 1G optical as that provides the best network isolation as the Lumin has an SFP port. My audio does NOT use USB so network connection is the final digital connection. There is no further digital optimization possible such as with a DDC or USB audio device. All further enhancements are only at the DAC level and otherwise analog in my setup. You can understand the emphasis on network quality in my case and also note the unique nature of streamer DAC setup.

The benefits I derive from the 10G protocol is from using a Mikrotik CRS 305-1G-4S for just the optical 10G connections, to centralize switching at 10G speed, thereby gaining the benefits of 'fill in this space with your choice of technical understanding'. Router, Servers and audio segment all connect at 10G. There is no use of 1G in this switch and no dropping of rate using a dual rate SFP+. Everything autonegotiates to 10G for the core switching. On the opposite ends of each connection I have 10G switches that connect components with 1G copper.

If I were to remove the 10G connections, thereby connecting all devices at 1G instead, the sound becomes less enjoyable immediately. I am including uPnp as well as Roonserver and NAS media. @jabbr has the unique limitation of not using 1G connections in a manner where such tests can be conducted otherwise this would be more apparent to them.

@barrows I do appreciate you sharing the benefits of a higher quality 1G device, as well as your thoughts on possible iitter impact,  and while I have not used the OMD I have researched enough to understand its benefits. I use the EtherRegen with an external clock going from it's B-side copper to A-side optical to the Lumin. 

 

 

Hi, Just chipping in some ideas to consider.

 

Apparently SFP modules generate noise, so you might get a better result with wired connection from ER Side B to the X1.  Side B is the better, and some ethernet cables may perform better than fibre.  Try a gpod quality Cat 6a UTP with Shakti on lines on each end.

 

You might find setting the CRS 305s to 1G or 100MB beneficial.

 

I have found Synergistic Research ECT beneficial inside CRS305, on the switch chip, II am yet to try on the SFP cages. And placing it on Synergistic Research Tranquility POD quite worthwhile.

 

I don't think it's 10G speed that is important, it is the lower jitter benefit of the 10G spec.

[dbastin]

30 minutes ago, audiom3 said:

Alex Crespi (UpTone Audio) assured me that both sides (A and B) of the moat are identical in data, clocking and power performance.

Perhaps that is not the whole story.

In my recent trials, Side B is superior.  I gather many woukd have similar observations.

[dbastin]

12 minutes ago, Philippe Bill said:

have you tested a Direct Attach Cable ?? (just before the driver or the last switch)
>>>the Melco version:
https://the-ear.net/review-hardware/melco-c1-d20-sfp-a-direct-connection/
>>>the FS version:
https://www.fs.com/de-en/products/40160.html

Not sure who you are asking.  I haven't tried DAC cable and I suspect it might only be good with Taiko.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, TheFlash said:

2 Nordost and 3 Waversa what?

Pretty sure its 2 QNET and Waversa WCore, WRouter and EXT Reference.

[dbastin]

8 minutes ago, Superdad said:

So that tallies up to around $12K+ in Ethernet switches!

 

Sorry if our humble—yet chock full of unique tech and costly chips—$680 EtherREGEN got lost in your mix. 

Obviously yours is not a typical use case…

Assisi and I are on a forum down under where many experiences with ethernet have been shared.

 

I recall Assisi first had a humble Bonn 8, then got hooked with Paul Pang Quad and I recall it was around then he tried ER, Melco and Sotm.  He may have been grappling with not having enough (or sharing) power supplies and the ER didn't survive this competition and/not contributing the flavour he preferred so was moved on.  It was much later Assisi realised the benefit of disconnecting the cable sheild, so it is quite possible there was some 'defeating the moat' going on in the early period with ER - I certainly made those mistakes.  It seems to me the ER benefits a great deal from careful attention the cable shields and independent power source otherwise it might not perform its best.  

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, TRHH said:

@jabbr Thanks for sharing your expertise here. 

 

As my current switch - Cisco Meraki Go GS110-8-HW-EU - and SFP - Finisar FTLF1318P3BTL - are End-Off-Life, the time has come for an replacement (upgrade).

 

A new switch with dual rate (SFP/SFP+), 8-12 ports, no need for PoE, fanless, and some new SFP/SFP+?

 

THANKS for any suggestions and have a nice WE

 

Torben

8- 12 ports?? ...

I suggest that any switch in the direct route to your hifi have the minimum ports and things connected directly to it.  And put caps on all unused ports.  This will minimise interference etc affecting the switch.

 

If you need more things connected, put them into a 2nd switch that is not in the direct route and connect that 2nd switch via fibre to the direct route.

 

Therefore, Mikrotik CRS 305 will give you SFP+ ports to connect up and downstream in the direct route to the hifi, and to connect to a switch or two not in the direct route.

 

CRS 305 accepts 12 - 57v so it is possible to power it with a 12v battery which typically output >12v but the 305 will regulate that.  So the power source is off grid (no grid noise) and no potential for noise being passed from one switch to the next via AC supply.

[dbastin]

6 hours ago, TRHH said:

Thanks for you comments.

 

The red ones are the ones that need to be replaced/upgraded:

 

 

Have a nice WE

 

Torben

I am curious why you think the switch is end of life?

 

I would change the FMC to 10GTek, Sonore OM or preferably EtherRegen.

 

I would insert CRS 305 in place of the Meraki Go and connect the Meraki Go to the CRS 305 via fibre to feed the devices connected to it.

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, TRHH said:

 

Here you go:

 

https://community.meraki.com/t5/Announcements/Meraki-Go-End-of-Sale-April-2025/ba-p/233755

 

That is way I am looking for a new switch.

 

Torben

 

Maybe I am missing something ... but just because they wont make Go products any more doesn't mean the existing ones are no good.  It seems your switch will serve its purpose until it dies.

[dbastin]

36 minutes ago, SQFIRST said:

SWOS 'sounds' better than ROUTEROS. There are reports of the ROUTEROS in 305 having throttled throughput.

I use CRS 305 as my router.  It is better sound to me than Ubiquiti Edge Router X SFP, presumably due to the 10G/SFP+ thing.  It typically delivers Tidal data fast enough to have uninterrupted play and streams TV at the same time.  Sometimes there is a drop out or very slow internet connection. I suspect that is due to the modem for the internet connection to my premises - these things should work for a long time but I'm thinking this one is starting to fail.

[dbastin]

11 hours ago, audiobomber said:

Thank you @audiom3. Despite all the chatter in this thread about the technical superiority of 10G vs. 1G, there are no comparisons that I've read directly comparing a 10G implementation to an audiophile switch.

 

Actually my system is 1G until the ER, then 100mbps. Technically primitive, but sounds fantastic.😛

For what its worth, I recently compared CRS 305 to ER.

As context, my system/network is very revealing, I can hear differences changing ground wires to the very first device and inserting RJ45 caps in it, and between that device and the endpoint it CRS 305, fibre, ER and wifi to the endpoint, and all cabling is very low noise (>US$1k retail).

 

In the comparison the CRS 305 and ER were powered via a dedicated power source:

 

main switch board > dedicated power line (JPS Labs) > Shunyata Sigma Analog power cable > Shunyata Cyclops > Synergistic Research (SR) Atmosphere UEF Level 3 power cable > W4S PS 1 > SR SX DC cable. 

The devices were sat on a SR Tranquility POD Carbon and grounded via SR HD SX ground cable to SR Active Ground Block SE.

The CRS 305 and ER were here:

 

incoming fibre > mandatory receiver/modem > cable > ER Side B - SIde A > fibre > CRS 305 > cable > Antipodes CX Oladra > cable > WAP (300MB/p) - wifi - > Devialet Pro 440 (I have previously established this wifi connection is extremely good)

 

Initially I basically swapped the order of the ER and CRS 305 to:

 

incoming fibre > mandatory receiver/modem > cable > CRS 305 > fibre > ER Side A - Side A > cable > Antipodes CX Oladra > cable > WAP - wifi - > Devialet Pro 440

 

In my view the ER in this set up was superior, easy to hear but not a huge margin.

 

I tried different configurations with ER and settled on this being best:

 

incoming fibre > mandatory receiver/modem > cable > CRS 305 > fibre > ER Side A

then Side A > CX

and Side B > cable WAP > - wifi - Devialet Pro

 

In my view the ER in this set up is superior to CRS 305 by an obvious and moderate margin.

[dbastin]

7 hours ago, Superdad said:

the Analog Devices synths we are moving to for EtherREGEN Gen2 have dramatically lower phase noise that any of the others.

Yay!

Audio endpoint designers really should include this type of stuff.

[dbastin]

8 hours ago, taipan254 said:

Sorry for jumping in here, but I am seeking a point of clarification as I think about my own network evolution. From earlier in this thread, I was under the impression that at least one of the connections had to be at 10G for the benefits of 10G to be realized. For example, I was under the impression the below scenarios would perform identically (let's call this "Impression 1"):

 

Internet ->1G Copper-> MicroTik Router ->10G Copper -> Music Server ->1G Optical-> Moated End Point -> USB-> Moated DAC

Internet ->1G Copper-> MicroTik Router ->10G Optical -> Music Server ->10G Optical-> Moated End Point -> USB-> Moated DAC

Internet ->1G Copper-> MicroTik Router ->1G Copper -> Music Server ->10G Optical-> Moated End Point -> USB-> Moated DAC

 

All provide a moat / isolation for the end point. All incorporate 10G (copper or optical; 1G or 10G optical always at endpoint).

 

Now I think I'm interpreting the conversation as "As long as you have a 10G router, even if you have everything on it running at 1G, you will still get the benefits of the 10G specification" (let's call this "Impression 2"). 

 

Is Impression 1 right or wrong? Is Impression 2 right or wrong? 

 

I'm just here to iron out any confusion I'm having. The router and endpoint upgrades are next on my to-do list.

I'd say its  not one or the other, both 'impressions' would contribute.  I have not tried 10G connections (SFP+ with SM fibre.)  What I did do is replace Ubiquiti Edge Router X SFP with CRS 305 (configured as router) and it certainly provided a notable improvement.

 

In my experience is it seems each device and connection contributes an 'impact' that can be passed on through 10G, fibre, wifi, common mode filters and EtherRegen Moat.  It is not necessarily the noise being passed on, the impact of the noise seems to be.  So my aim is to optimise each device and connection ... I replace each with the lowest noise/jitter (ie. best advantage for SQ) device that can replace it that I can afford.  I aim for cost effectiveness and sometimes that does not equate to highest cost.

 

In your scenarios I am curious:

1. what Mikrotik router you use

2. what is the MOAT for the endpoint and DAC.

 

8 hours ago, jabbr said:

If the Music Server is connected by fiberoptic with the switch at 10G then upstream noise (from the internet and server ) is blocked.

If the switch is connected to the endpoint by fiber then common mode noise from the switch is blocked.

I think this assumes all noise (and possibly the impacts of it) can be blocked by fibre or the 10G spec.  I'm not sure that is the case.

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

There are actual measurements. Upstream noise isn’t transmitted. Whatever SQ differences you hear are not via the Ethernet stream transmitted along 10G+ fiber and most certainly not at 100G.

 

what you hear is via a different mechanism and there are several possibilities. some of the possibilities are electrical. 

 

I appreciate you are passionate about the specs and measurements and I would not have adopted 10G if it weren't for this.  You may be right that I am not hearing 'noise' (or whatever) transmitted by the network, but it is hard to believe.

 

As recently mentioned, my network is:

incoming fibre > mandatory receiver/modem > cable > CRS 305 > fibre > ER Side A

then Side A > CX

and [MOAT] Side B > cable > WAP > - wifi - Devialet Pro

 

I can make a change at the mandatory receiver/modem (passive or physically connected to it) and I can hear a difference ... and this is despite:

• it being powered on a separate AC circuit to the CX, ER and endpoint
• it is on a different floor of the premises
• the ethernet 'signal' passes through 10G CRS 305, fibre, EtherRegen Moat and finally wifi
• the WAP is powered by battery
• for noise to transmit from the EtherRegen to the endpoint (ie. bypass the Moat and wifi) it would need to get through 2 excellent power conditioners

I am close to implementing a number of batteries, each ethernet device will have its own battery (off grid, no connection between them, no power supply or AC cord noise, only noise potentially via DC cable) and perhaps also the Antipodes CX.  I will even be isolating the battery chargers from the DC supply when listening to the hifi.

 

I would be interested to hear what other possibilities are so I can address those.

3 hours ago, taipan254 said:

For power, I use a Bluetti AC180 battery / inverter combo, ...

 

The idea would be to have an "island" where network enters via fiber, and all power is sourced from batteries or the Bluetti battery / inverter combo.

 

Be mindful the inverter, BMS etc may generate noise (I'd guess a lot less the AC grid).  I am going 12v battery > DC-DC regulator (if required) > 12v device.  The DC-DC regulators are from https://mp-audio.nl/

 

I am not yet sure if inverters can deliver current fast enough for power amps, but that is another topic.

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

This is the problem with guessing. I researched inverters when having my home built a few years ago. There wasn't a single one that exceeded the requirements the power utility was required to meet for power supplied to my home, and the vast majority were worse. Keeping the audio system inside the home off the same circuits devoted to in-house noisemakers like refrigerators, A/C systems, LED lights, even appliances with microcontrollers, is a far more effective means of reducing noise than generating your own power.

Using 12v LiFePO4 batteries to supply 12v devices is 'relatively' easy and cost alot less than reducing AC supplied noise to the same degree (conditioner, power cords, LPS), the battery cost less than some fuses.

 

But, inverters seem a gamble.  Some people get pleasing results from the all in one camping battery/inverters.  Given my amps peak power supply is 4000w each channel, it's a costly gamble ... the inverter + battery cost more than a power conditioner.

 

I digress

[dbastin]

1 hour ago, hltf said:

I see thank you for the tip.

 

Guess I will just stick to ethernet.

Yep.  Use the shortest (a few cm) wired ethernet possible, UTP (unshielded) or shield only connected at upstream end ... or there are DIY concoctions of cable wrapped around magnets and with 'filters' clipped on ...  or try 'audiophile' type ethernet cables.

 

Toslink to you DAC has advantages of optical but limited bit rate, whereas the other formats can have higher bitrate and so you can use upsampling which filters the signal (to varying extents).  You have to choose what suits you.  BTW, not all toslink cables sound the same, which applies to cable for the other formats too (AES, SPDIF, etc).