Optical Network Configurations

[plissken]

7 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Look at the HQPlayer threads... the processing isn't trivial nor faster than real time. Network dropouts are very audible.

 

I understand. I just don't go for 2000X over sampling... I play native format and apply SoX.

[plissken]

5 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

 

These algorithms are objectively different but whether they are useful for anyone's own listening preferences, or with anyone's own DAC is for them to decide.  Everyone should listen for themselves.

 

Agreed. Different strokes for different folks... It's all good.

[plissken]

On 10/12/2020 at 1:43 PM, charlesphoto said:

In regards to use of 10/100 ethernet

 

Considering that 100mbit is ~11 times overkill for 24/192 PCM data...

[plissken]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

 You may (dis)like this post:

Maybe we bring different switches to your $8000 challenge 😀

 

It's not an issue of like or dislike. It's an issue of understanding the technical underpinnings. Once data has been transferred the medium that it went over has fudge all to do with the data.

 

Claims w/o evidence are just as easily dismissed w/o evidence. Hence my $8000 to anyone's $1000. Bring a Melco, bring a Bonn Silent Angel, bring an eR. I already setup a proof of concept video showing that I can test in situ, in real time.

 

Also I can easily test out the above: Setup a RAMDisk and copy one file over commodity hardware and one file over esoteric hardware. Foobar 2K AB/X plug-in. That's in essence what is being claimed is that jitter/phase-noise, low/high leakage current is somehow embedded in the file.

[plissken]

2 hours ago, ASRMichael said:

Can you prove it’s not? If not why not? 

 

I want to change tack: You go find a network pro that will knowing what I, Barros, Jabbr, know that will take up a contrary position.

 

Because what's happening is like a MD debating health issues with their patient. I'd rather that patient go get another MD to bring to the table.

[plissken]

29 minutes ago, charlesphoto said:

, but if you have a dozen or so points, that can really add up to a good average before one even gets to the analog front end. Of course as always, YMMV, but it's what I've noticed with my system(s), my ears.

 

What about the 60 or so points for those that have improved their streaming services that they have zero controls over?

 

I trust your ears as much as you do. Hence the $8000. Which I also offer to you. I've made a proof of concept video showing how this can be done in real-time with me in another room swapping cabling while you listen.

 

 

[plissken]

32 minutes ago, charlesphoto said:

@plissken Could you please drop this $8k challenge game? I find it more than a bit juvenile, perhaps even insulting considering what the world is going through these days. Of course any discussion of high end hifi could fit that description, but lets leave it at a nice diversion from the world, whether we agree or a disagree on what's being discussed is immaterial. And if somebody was really to take you up on it (which nobody ever will), how about just leave it at a nice dinner and bottle of their choice like most adults would? Thank you, Charles

 

If it's all about the optics of the $$ then I'm perfectly fine with it all going to charity.  Travel expenses would still need to be covered and imo that's not unreasonable.

[plissken]

30 minutes ago, ASRMichael said:

I agree, but also disagree. Why? Because you can’t prove it either way. Is it not because we don’t have the right measurement tools yet? It works both ways as far as I’m concerned. 

 

Sure you can. If people are steadfast in their ability of ears only discrimination, not only do I believe them, I'm willing to pay them handsomely for what should amount to quick work of me and my position on the matter.

[plissken]

12 minutes ago, charlesphoto said:

Perhaps we all need to stop talking in absolutes.

 Guys... Networking is about absolutes. Banking is now 99% electronic.

[plissken]

1 hour ago, ASRMichael said:

This is just a question? Does a network pro understand file creation? 

 

I understand we aren't talking a zero copy stack. I understand MD5 and CRC32.

1 hour ago, ASRMichael said:

Are we just talking network pro here? Surely it’s ever aspect of the digital chain? Also is John S not a pro is his field? 

 

We are talking about networking as it pertains to optical interfaces. I'm sure John is a pro in his field. The white paper he authored backs my (and others) position about breaking the electrical layer (wifi or optical) and getting as much xfer speed as possible (802.11AX or 802.3ae).

 

A pro would produce objective, reproducible, data. I've done this more than a few times over the years here. Everything from showing FLAC levels only affect compression time  and resource usage (PC and Raspberry Pi) and not decompression, to FLAC's being extracted to the original MD5 hash to Wired and WiFi buffered playback and what it looks like from a non-realtime perspective.

 

Barrows has been speaking rather sagely about all of this but it's falling on deaf ears. Interesting for a hobby that is focused on active listening.

[plissken]

1 hour ago, ASRMichael said:

Networking is about absolutes! Ha ha! We can agree absolutely that networks are not absolute! Otherwise there wouldn’t be failures/errors! Nothing in the universe is absolute! 

 

Networking is basically a 1 in 4 billion undetected error rate. Nothing is brickwall absolute but we are pretty darn close.

 

I deal with hardware failures by designing with redundancy in mind. Configuration and design how ever are the bane of my existence. Was doing T-Shoot today and something tangential popped up when looking at the RIB on a routing switch that has set off another chain events. Sometimes you're the bat, sometime the ball.

[plissken]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

We aren’t listening to the switch in your experiment. Rather the buffer.

 

Trust me when I and others tell you this: YOU ARE ALWAYS LISTENING TO THE BUFFER.

[plissken]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

Not sure with paper says anything about speed. 

 

Most certainly does speak to speed if you're in the know. Johns phase noise point can only exist on Tx/Rx for starters. So as you go from 100 to 1000 to 10,000 your transmission interval is shorter and so is your exposure to "phase" noise.  Also if this is the case then you should be able to play back a file from local storage and tell when the NIC is in use since that is the argument being made.

 

Let me ask you this: When getting a tooth cavity filled do we go with an old drill at 4000 RPM or with a SOTA drill at 400,000 to 800,000 RPM?

[plissken]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This would be true if the buffer was 1k. It's like saying, "that's a picture of me when is was younger." All pictures are when you were younger :~)

 

Chris, your reply is pretty much the point that I, Barrows, Jabbr, have been trying to make. If it's a motion camera they even have something called a frame buffer. Some really high end cameras can store like 1,000,000 per second.

[plissken]

2 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Wouldn’t we achieve the same with a WiFi USB dongle?

Music will play after we pull that connection.  
 

Do you accept to do it this way ? If no, why not ?

 

I'm an open advocate of WiFi. I even shot a video of playing 24/192 over a $200 Asus laptop with 802.11G 54Mpbs. You could see the file max out the Network Monitor and then ramp down to idle while watching JRiver play. Then with no break in playback watch the Network Monitor ramp up again. Rinse and Repeat.

 

My WiFi consist of 3 TP-Link Omada 1350AC with PoE and the Omada Wireless Controller.  $56 a pop and I routinely and on average get 38MB/s. So 300%+ over 100MB/s copper and anywhere from $250 to $1850 less expensive than other options.

[plissken]

48 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

Do you agree that clock phase noise (threshold jitter) exist

Sure does. And it exists in my 10GBe setup for the entire .225 seconds that it takes my system to buffer up a 75MB track.

 

It doesn't exist for the 6:51 that the track continues to play for.

 

I feel like we are reliving 'Verizon can't do Math' over and over and over again.

[plissken]

49 minutes ago, kerisabe said:

 How are the ciscos compared to the finisar? Have you had any experience comparing the two? Thanks

 

I think they would sound the same...

[plissken]

1 hour ago, kerisabe said:

I thought the finisars are preferred more than the other sfps. Ive got the finisars otw, i guess ill have to wait and see. Thanks for getting back @plissken

 

Most companies farm out their SFP to OEM production. I don't know if this is still the case but all my Cisco Badged SFP SX modules are made by Finisar. This is another reason I'm incredulous when people are hearing differences. You are most likely purchasing from a pool that is only provided by a short list of manufacturers.

 

I doubt TP-Link has their own production line for just SFP/SFP+ modules. They don't sell enough of them vs their switch gear to take on the cost in house production.

 

There is a very good chance someone has compared the same exact module, with different labels, and have all sorts of flowery prose to describe one and all sorts of words like 'dull' and 'lifeless' to describe another.

 

People around here don't know what they don't know...

[plissken]

1 minute ago, kerisabe said:

Ok thats a legit explanation @plisskenI shall have a proper listen/comparison and see if indeed the finisar sfps are best. Not keepin my hopes up. Thanks to you

I ordered a TP-Link SX module and will let you know if I can determine it's OEM.

[plissken]

58 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

This is the reason I have recommended Finisar. Intel also uses both Finisar and Avago as OEM for SFP(+) modules.

 

That said Cisco branded SFP modules which likely used to be $1k back in the day, are going to be good quality, whatever state of the art was back when they were made. 

All the HBA optics I've installed have been Avago...

[plissken]

I have a programmer/reader that I use for FS modules to re-encode their generic modules for whatever platforms I bump into and plugged in the TP-Link transceiver but no extended info is available.

 

I would like to remind everyone that when you are comparing modules you could be comparing the same thing. These are data devices and I think when properly blinded you would be hard pressed to trust your ears.

[plissken]

18 hours ago, jabbr said:

including LSI

 

I always preferred LSI DAS. Just easy to setup. Good UI. Just always seemed to work. I started using their SCSI adapters with Power Mac's back in the day. Better functionality than Adaptec at 20% less the cost.

[plissken]

13 minutes ago, jabbr said:

This is true:

 

SOME SFP+ modules will work in SFP ports

SOME SFP+ modules will auto-negotiate to 1Gbs in SFP+ ports

MOST SFP modules will work in MOST SFP+ ports

 

 

 

I've never designed or recommended SFP+ modules in SFP cages. I've had it simply not work before.

 

What I have had work is SFP transceivers in SFP cages, SFP transceivers in SFP+ cages, SFP+ in SFP+ and SFP28 and SFP56 and QSFP+ (by way of adapter).

[plissken]

35 minutes ago, pl_svn said:

whilst at it... anyone (@Superdad?) knows if this will work with the EtheRegen? 😶

 

thanks

 

Looking at that part you might as well try it for $49. If you go the SX route with OM2 cabling your at less than 1/2 the cost though with FS.com SX transceivers being ~$6.

[plissken]

8 hours ago, Duke40 said:

I am also getting a large number of pause frames with 1Gbe

This would be flow control kicking in. To be expected. It's most likely the NIC on the endpoint generating pause frames.