Optical Network Configurations

[jabbr]

16 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

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

That's fine. Almost all DACs do some type of upsampling on chip and most convert to SDM. Moving this processing to a workstation allows algos and filters which otherwise just can't practically run on a chip -- at least not in a cost efficient manner. This topic has been very widely discussed elsewhere here. In any case I want to be clear that the design decisions that have led to my own system stress heavy heavy computing (on my Dell Xeon W-2245 workstation) and very low power NAA connected by fiberoptic ethernet. When I can almost double the per cycle work done on my workstation (i.e. run the ASDM7EC algo at DSD512 in realtime) then I'll get a new workstation!

 

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.

 

***my workstation was $1700 shipped from Dell -- and a great deal -- to which I added a Mellanox ConnectX-5 NIC. I needed the ConnectX-5 because I'm using 100Gbase-LR4 (single mode) modules -- the cables are much cheaper (LC-LC single mode, vs MPO-12 multistrand for multimode) but the modules use a bit more power for LR4.

[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.

[stray_cat]

On 10/11/2020 at 8:04 AM, jabbr said:

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.

+1. This is what I did. 2xMikrotiks used as FMCs and 2 Finisar 1310nm DFB SM SFP+ modules. Plug-n-play & definite uptick in satisfaction wrt coherence and musical timing. I'm thinking adhering to the 10Gbe specs & guidelines have a lot to do with the timing improvements. If you're on the fence, hope this helps.

 

Adding 2 similar type Finisar (but ~2.67Gbs SFP) this week to complete fiber up to the eRegen. This additional link costing quite a bit less than what a (used) 1.5m AQ cinnamon it's replacing did. If talking about affordable, this is very much so.

[charlesphoto]

In regards to use of 10/100 ethernet there must be something in it as many high end streaming manufacturers still swear by it. As always, the proof is in the listening, not in the written specifications, or best theory. 

[stray_cat]

yea definitely.. The B side of the eR is maxed at 100 I think and I've not compared yet but read and trusted that the Sotm sms-200 neo sounds better at 100 than 1000 which is what mine is set to.

 

I have not looked into how or if it's even possible to set the Mikrotiks to 100 and listen, if I do I'll report back. I imagine 100mbps is plenty enough speed for music.

[R1200CL]

 

Interesting observation. 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-46#post-587473

 

[R1200CL]

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-58#post-596794
 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-177#post-645071
 

[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...

[barrows]

2 hours ago, R1200CL said:

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-58#post-596794
 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-177#post-645071
 

I would advise that folks do not believe all that they read, and do your own comparisons, in your system.  Additionally, a degree of technical understanding of how and why different approaches might make sonic differences can be very helpful in sorting things out.

Anyone can find, and re-post, opinions on the Internet to support just about any point of view, especially when we are talking about entirely subjective observations.

[k27R]

Agreed. do your own comparisons in your own system and see what works for you. I tried two of the SFP's configurations that Taiko recommended, and greatly preferred one over the other.  Stuck with it since and never looked back.

[R1200CL]

On 10/11/2020 at 3:01 PM, 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.

 You may (dis)like this post:

Maybe we bring different switches to your $8000 challenge 😀

[barrows]

9 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

 You may (dis)like this post:

Maybe we bring different switches to your $8000 challenge 😀

Or perhaps, if one looks at this excerpt:

 

"You can do that same test in my system, and although you disconnect the cable while playing, the buffered tracks using the switch with the upgraded clock sound much better. In other words, even if you disconnect the network cable, whatever good or bad things your network does is already embedded in the buffered track somehow. Don't ask me how or why... I wish I could explain all that, but I can't. 

Sorry to tell you that, but I don't agree with your simple theory. I wish it was that simple, but it's a lot more complex than that."

 

One might conclude that the "massive" improvement is actually imaginary.  When a person proposes an improvement with no possible actual technical explanation for such, an observer must be allowed to suspect that the "improvement" was not actually real.  The upstream clock in the switch is gone and technically cannot have any further influence on the sound quality once the file data is in the downstream buffer, and the Ethernet cable is unplugged.  The clock in the switch is not "embedded" in the data somehow, that clock is long gone when the data is in the downstream buffer, as data in a buffer has no clock reference at that point.  John Swenson has speculated that upstream clock phase noise does matter to downstream playback, but this can only happen when the Ethernet cable is in place (and is still unproven speculation).  This is one of those cases where I would suggest that extra ordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

Consider: if there was somehow a way which an Ethernet timing clock "embedded" its phase noise/jitter in the data, then the internet would not work because all of the accumulating clock jitter over hundreds, or even thousands of re-clocking steps would so corrupt the data as for it to become unintelligible.  The same could be said of streaming audio from the likes of Qobuz-if clock jitter is accumulating and "embedding" itself in the data, the sound quality of streaming audio would be hopelessly corrupted due to the hundreds of re-clocking steps on the way from the Qobuz servers to one's home (and indeed, I very much doubt also that these clocks are ultra low jitter ones, or that the power supplies used for the internet path from Qobuz to one's home are SJ designs, or even linear for that matter).

[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.

[ASRMichael]

19 minutes ago, plissken said:That's in essence what is being claimed is that jitter/phase-noise, low/high leakage current is somehow embedded in the file.

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

[barrows]

9 minutes ago, ASRMichael said:

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

When person(s) make extraordinary claims which are completely contrary to how Network data transfers actually work in a technical sense, then the onus for "proof' would fall on the person making the extraordinary claim, not on the person suggesting that the claim is unsupported by any reasonable technical explanation.

[charlesphoto]

My take on all this is that thread name is a misnomer - more appropriate would be the "Subtle improvements to the network" thread. What I've noticed in my own setup, is that improvements made may only equal 1-5% per point (and more for something like an etherRegen or opticalModule bridge), 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.

 

@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

[ASRMichael]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

When person(s) make extraordinary claims which are completely contrary to how Network data transfers actually work in a technical sense, then the onus for "proof' would fall on the person making the extraordinary claim, not on the person suggesting that the claim is unsupported by any reasonable technical explanation.

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. 
 

 

[charlesphoto]

17 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. 
 

 

I'll agree with that! Perhaps we all need to stop talking in absolutes. That's still something I'm trying to control myself with when dealing with my children or other aspects of my life. 

[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.

[pkane2001]

8 minutes ago, plissken said:

Banking is now 99% electronic.

 

That's why I'll take my $8000 in gold bullion.

 

[barrows]

45 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. 
 

 

I do not agree that many of these things cannot be proved, although proving a negative is virtually impossible, proving a positive improvement should be very possible.  The measurement tools certainly do exist for this, as we have measurements which can resolve many things well below the threshold of audibility; the real challenge in proving things is figuring out exactly what to measure.

This is an old problem, with a bit of a new paradigm on it from the current state of affairs in the US: unfortunately our culture here in the US has, in the past few years, embraced a concept of there being no such thing as an actual, objective fact at all.  And this concept has very unfortunately spread to many endeavors and experiences. While I embrace the notion of being open minded, that is not the same thing as dismissing actual facts which are objective and well established.  If a person seeking advancement in any endeavor dismisses actual, established, objective facts, they are left with nothing; no basis from which to proceed, and this is a very dangerous place to be indeed, as one ends up merely randomly trying things in an effort to make progress.

 

While I would readily admit that we do not know everything which affects audio playback performance objectively, not knowing everything does not mean that we know nothing.  Dismissing objective facts as to how electronics actually operate is not a way forward, it just leads to madness and sideways, or even backwards movement.

 

As to an example of "proof" of an improvement, I would accept a blinded listening test as proof, if it was properly conducted and returned a result better than 80% in a trial of 20 tests.  This could be achieved without the need to establish new measurement protocols.