Jump to content
IGNORED

Optical Network Configurations


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, jabbr said:

Furthermore no 1Gbe switch vendor has demonstrated better than 0.025 UI jitter when jitter has been injected. 


Isn’t that a acceptable number ? 

What is the accepted number in order to pass the test (10GB) ?

 

So let’s take a 10GB switch then, (like the Mikrotik) and add a RJ45 SFP and also the SFP+ FTLX1471D3BCV, as this is the only modules should that will fit today’s equipment, (unless your building a PC endpoint), should I expect both those two cases to be better jitter etc., compared to a one GB switch?

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, R1200CL said:


Isn’t that a acceptable number ? 

What is the accepted number in order to pass the test (10GB) ?

 

So let’s take a 10GB switch then, (like the Mikrotik) and add a RJ45 SFP and also the SFP+ FTLX1471D3BCV, as this is the only modules should that will fit today’s equipment, (unless your building a PC endpoint), should I expect both those two cases to be better jitter etc., compared to a one GB switch?


They should both pass the stressed eye pattern/stressed receiver test. 
 

The RJ-45 doesn’t eliminate the possibility of common mode node transmission. Moreover copper 10 Gbe uses much more power, so I prefer fiber.

 

My subjective impression is that the benefit is moving from copper to fiber (at 1Gbe). I can’t say that moving to 10Gbe has a SQ benefit, rather for anyone who is concerned about Ethernet jitter — it’s a non-issue.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, jabbr said:

They should both pass the stressed eye pattern/stressed receiver test. 

Thanks. Good to know. 
 

27 minutes ago, jabbr said:

My subjective impression is that the benefit is moving from copper to fiber (at 1Gbe).

I think most will agree to that, at least if proper equipment is used.
 

I would like to see fiber and SFP+/SPF28 is the standard for audio streaming, DAC’s and endpoints. 
As said before I don’t expect it to happen, but if one of Sonore, Uptone or SOtM releases products that complies with part of the 10GB standard, maybe others will copy.
 

29 minutes ago, jabbr said:

I can’t say that moving to 10Gbe has a SQ benefit, rather for anyone who is concerned about Ethernet jitter — it’s a non-issue.

Well, moving to 10GB gives us an expectation of a jitter and phase noise free transfer. Which is a good thing. After all handling of jitter and phase noise is what the etherRegen does, and it didn’t need to comply with 10GB specifications to do. 

 

Since you expect both those modules comply with 10GB standard outputting 1 GB, my suggest test would be interesting. Something for the Novel tread maybe to play with. 
 

Maybe I purchase a Mikrotik (And sell my etherRegen)...😀

I just emailed them for jitter measurements. (Yes, I probably won’t get it).

 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Since you expect both those modules comply with 10GB standard outputting 1 GB, my suggest test would be interesting. Something for the Novel tread maybe to play with. 

 

From a "novel" point of view, the move to 100Gbe gets really interesting and basically why Nvidia bought Mellanox.

 

From a compute POV there is "remote DMA" in which a CPU has access to memory on a remote machine, so the memory channel has been converted to fiber. Also NVMEoF where the NVME storage is also done over fiber. https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/08/14/making-selene-pandemic-ai/ ... so basically super high density fiberoptic fabric.

 

In my case my storage server houses the music, video and other media <-100gbe-> My xeon-w workstation does HQP upsampling/filtering and then sent to endpoint <--1gbe--> all over fiber. Note that SMB2 and SMB3 both support RDMA (SMB Direct) https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/SMB3_kernel_status so essentially the entire software stack runs in memory (and the music is largely cached in memory)

 

If you want to be assured that nothing is accessing any physical disc, your NIC can boot the servers across the network using PXE https://linuxconfig.org/network-booting-with-linux-pxe

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment

Can all these be used in audio ? (I haven’t a clue if that is a valid question). 
 

I just copied from Finisar headers from their chart. 
 

Fast Ethernet Optical

Gigabit Ethernet
1x Fibre Channel
2x Fibre Channel
4x Fibre Channel
8x Fibre Channel
16x Fibre Channel
32x Fibre Channel
SONET OC-3

SONET OC-12
SONET OC-48

SONET OC-192
SONET OC-768

OTN OTU3
OTN OTU4
10x Fibre Channel
10G Ethernet

25G Ethernet
40G Ethernet

100G Ethernet
200G Ethernet

IB QDR
IB FDR
IB EDR
IB SDR

1000BASE-T
PON

Link to comment
19 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Isn’t John’s white paper then more relevant.

 

Their white paper works against them however. Boiled down it makes two points:

 

1. The faster your wire speed the better (since this equates to less phase noise/jitter)

 

2. Go optical since it's a low and high impedance leakage 'moat'.

 

3. It works against them since they operate at 100MB so you have the largest amount of time of signal on wire and it's copper.

 

At least the other 'audiophile' switches I've seen give you 1GBe.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, plissken said:

Their white paper works against them however. Boiled down it makes two points:

Well, probably @JohnSwenson should answer. On the other hand measurements will come one day. (And you made three points, not two 😀)
 

1 hour ago, plissken said:

1. The faster your wire speed the better (since this equates to less phase noise/jitter)

My understanding is this is a consequence of the 10GB requirements. We would be happy with much less. Actually there is a low limit to how much speed a streamer can consume 😀

(unless an huge buffer). 

 

1 hour ago, plissken said:

2. Go optical since it's a low and high impedance leakage 'moat'.

I think many will agree. 
However, since many didn’t have that option, etherRegen served that purpose.

I really hope the future is optical. New proper SPF’s may be a bit expensive. Can we hope for Finisar or similar develop a audiophile version 😀

We would for sure wait until SFP is a normal option in the consumer marketed. Many haven’t discovered RJ45 yet, and just stated to do USB properly. 
 

1 hour ago, plissken said:

3. It works against them since they operate at 100MB so you have the largest amount of time of signal on wire and it's copper.

That has been very good explained by @Superdad many times. 
You should know better. With such a comment, it seems you have an hidden agenda to put Uptone in a bad light. 

 

1 hour ago, plissken said:

At least the other 'audiophile' switches I've seen give you 1GBe.

Really ? Do an audiophile switch exist ? Aren’t they all bad copies based on John’s always willing to share his knowledge. You may have something to learn there 😉

 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, R1200CL said:

My understanding is this is a consequence of the 10GB requirements. We would be happy with much less. Actually there is a low limit to how much speed a streamer can consume 😀

Jitter can only happen when data is x-fered. The faster the x-fer the less time you spend in the jitter-sphere.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, R1200CL said:

That has been very good explained by @Superdad many times. 
You should know better. With such a comment, it seems you have an hidden agenda to put Uptone in a bad light. 

 

The only thing we have from any of the 'Audiophile' switch manufacturers is mere conjecture. I would like to assume that manufacturers took an instrumented approach to this. That is they identified and demonstrable problem and then using that data had a design approach with a before and after.

 

I do know better though. I've implemented AVB and AES64 in broadcast environments.

 

I welcome John and his 31 years of experience to any open public forum to go through this.

3 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Really ? Do an audiophile switch exist ? Aren’t they all bad copies based on John’s always willing to share his knowledge. You may have something to learn there 😉

 

I'm in a constant state of learning.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, plissken said:

Jitter can only happen when data is x-fered. The faster the x-fer the less time you spend in the jitter-sphere.


Interesting. But since we’re not after speed, and at the same time minimum of jitter, any idea how that should be solved. (Without buffers). 
The speed is more or less decided by the music stream I would expect. 
 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, plissken said:

 

This is most likely the 'many' that insist my setup sucks....


Has people done that ? Really? (That sucks too). 
Not fully knowing your system, I’m sure it’s good. 
 

With a PC as endpoint and one GB buffer, you have solved some issues. But how if one would like to stream from Tidal and Qobuz, is there a way to buffer that stream ?

How huge buffer is needed. 
 

Please take some time to explain. (I use Roon, not JRiver). I like to understand. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, plissken said:

I do know better though. I've implemented AVB and AES67 in broadcast environments.


That’s a whole other ballgame or ?

Even you aren’t benefit from that AES67 at home ?

 

How can AES67 help us reduce jitter and phase noise?

I think Roon has strong opinions why they didn’t go that route, so if you’re familiar with them, it would be nice to know and learn where or if they where wrong. I may add NAA also. 
 

3 hours ago, plissken said:

I welcome John and his 31 years of experience to any open public forum to go through this.


Well, that’s a better use of energy that your $8000 challenge. 
 

I’m sure Cris will be happy to facilitate this. 
 

But if you’re only in for professional network from 10GB and above, I can see the challenge of a meaningful discussion.
I’m willing to accept that your and @jabbr setups is alt least equal or probably in several aspects better than etherRegen. So is the cost, as well skills needed to get there. And I’m not after you give me a stressed eye pattern 😀

As an example. Very few of us are able to understand how we can benefit and set up a managed switch. I have one. User manual is huge, and I don’t have a clue how to have any practical use for it.

 

So you can have everything correct and “win” the debate, but still end up as “the looser”. 


What we need from your knowledge is something useful for most of us. 
 

3 hours ago, plissken said:

I'm in a constant state of learning.


Good. Hopefully you can share your knowledge 😀

I have learned a lot myself during the years I’ve been a member here. 

 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, R1200CL said:


Interesting. But since we’re not after speed, and at the same time minimum of jitter, any idea how that should be solved. (Without buffers). 
The speed is more or less decided by the music stream I would expect. 
 

 

We ARE after speed. Jitter is the variance from ideal timing of a signal. If this variance supposedly affects the DAC output you want this in as small a time window as possible.

 

The music stream is not realtime. It's already sitting somewhere in it's entirety and can 100% be transferred as fast as you can manage to local storage/buffer.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There are people saying the Earth is flat. Look hard enough and you’ll find people saying anything you wish. 
 

I recommend listening for yourself. 


Chris, I was looking for a possible explanation why there may be a difference in players. It really shouldn’t, as everything is digital, some some people hear a difference, and I was hoping maybe that buffer thing could be a valid explanation, or part of one. 
 

I think your answer didn’t help much.

 

Here is another question:

Will use of RAAT determine how buffers can be used ?

 

Is there a way to set up playing SW, so that people would agree, that it would be a fair test setup where you only tested the sound of the SW. (Sounds a bit bizarre maybe). 
 

 

Link to comment

 

9 hours ago, R1200CL said:

 

But if you’re only in for professional network from 10GB and above, I can see the challenge of a meaningful discussion.
I’m willing to accept that your and @jabbr setups is alt least equal or probably in several aspects better than etherRegen. So is the cost, as well skills needed to get there. And I’m not after you give me a stressed eye pattern 😀

As an example. Very few of us are able to understand how we can benefit and set up a managed switch. I have one. User manual is huge, and I don’t have a clue how to have any practical use for it.

 

You don't need to manage your switch. Just set it to unmanaged mode, plug in the cables and use it. No need to overthink this. The cost, well the $130 Mikrotik brings 10Gbe to within reach of 99% of audiophiles, and is the cheapest solution to concerns of network jitter. Also my Clearfog Base ARM endpoint is $135 (solid-run) and has two SFP ports -- solid-run has ARM boards with SFP(+) but they are a bit more. This also runs standard Linux (debian or ubuntu)/armbian. Yes you have to load Linux on it but believe me its easier than in 2016 when I used to custom compile my kernels.

 

For the majority of people who don't want to fiddle around with the Linux command line, the packaged solutions from Sonore hit the spot.

 

I don't advocate that anyone do what I took for me to get my Mellanox SN2700 (100Gbe) up and running, but it was an extreme education for me. It runs Azure Linux! Running my own singlemode cable through my 1950s era house was a project (thick concrete walls in basement etc. It all depends on how much effort anyone is willing to put into this.

 

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment

 

2 hours ago, plissken said:

The music stream is not realtime. It's already sitting somewhere in it's entirety and can 100% be transferred as fast as you can manage to local storage/buffer.

 

Not always. I use Roon which accepts Qobuz. Roon can upsample, but I send it to HQPlayer which upsamples and converts to SDM before sending to one of my DACs. You can use different filters and algos but keep the source audio on the NAS.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
45 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

Chris, I was looking for a possible explanation why there may be a difference in players. It really shouldn’t, as everything is digital, some some people hear a difference, and I was hoping maybe that buffer thing could be a valid explanation, or part of one. 

One very clear difference are the filters and algorithms used to upsample and SDM. Roon has a few filters, HQPlayer has a very rich set of settings and does both PCM and DSD. jRiver uses the DLNA transport which I dislike. XXHE is PCM alone and doesn't use a network model. HQPlayer is the very best use case for a high powered workstation using sophisticated upsampling algorithms to feed a very low powered NAA attached to the DAC. This is the model I've used to separate high powered noisy workstation from electrically quiet audio system using Ethernet isolation. The big hunks of metal in my listening area are my amps and my isolation transformer(s). A plug into the wall and a nice yellow fiber are the only connections.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

 

Not always. I use Roon which accepts Qobuz. Roon can upsample, but I send it to HQPlayer which upsamples and converts to SDM before sending to one of my DACs. You can use different filters and algos but keep the source audio on the NAS.

 

The source file still isn't real-time. Your on the fly manipulation is however. I know it's splitting hairs.

 

On my end point I do any convolution needed and I still can queue up 1GB at a time. This stuff is trivial for an Intel 4105 based Mainboard. I would encourage a DIY approach since you can do all of this with 4GB RAM, SSD, Silent PSU, 10GB PCIe for ~$200.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...