Overall Isolation - network, USB, and power

[gstew]

I am interested in trying the passive Ethernet filter approach, but my quick checks didn't turn up anything for less than $200. I just got 2 used TrendNet FMCs for $15 ea from Amazon along with a $13 fiber cable and 2 Jameco linear regulated adapters for $11 each, total of less than $70. They are an improvement with the stock SMPSs, better with the Jameco linear supplies or my DIY'd linears, and even better using an Amazon-sourced $25 5v phone charging battery and a 5v linear from Jameco on the receiving side FMC to keep the battery charged as mentioned in the comments of the AudioStream networking article.

 

So I get a full setup for <$100, under $150 for all new gear. Is the passive setup better than this? Or is it just a desire to keep the system simple?

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Can you please supply a link to the battery you got on ebay? Also, where did you get the cable to connect to the FMC? Does the TPlink need 2.5mm or 2.1mm DC barrel?

 

Why not just use one battery to power both FMC? Have you tested how long the FMC can run on a single charge?

 

Thank you!

 

I normally have a 5v Jameco Linear Adapter charging each TeckNet pack while I'm using it to run my FMCs. In my setup, the difference between running the FMCs on a 9v Jameco linear adapter versus the TeckNet while being charged is greater than what I get between the battery being charged versus just the battery alone. So I keep them on charge while playing so I don't worry about damaging the battery pack (which should be internally protected, but who knows?).

 

The longest I've used one this way is about 10 hours. During that time the charge state appeared to stay the same... it did not finish charging, but also did not show any lower charge state, so it can probably run anywhere from days to forever this way.

 

If you run both FMC from the same supply, you are short-circuiting some amount of the isolation they provide. I wouldn't recommend that.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

VERY interesting. So let me make sure I understand...you never unplug the battery from the charger? And this configuration sounds better than just running each FMC from the unplugged battery? That would be ideal for me as I dont want to worry about remembering to unplug or charge anything.

 

I wonder what the potential reason is for this.

 

Oh dear... sorry for not being very clear.

 

Best SQ is with the battery alone powering the FMCs.

 

2nd best with the battery powering the FMCs while it is being charged by the 5v linear. And yes, when I'm running this configuration I just leave the battery plugged into the FMC and the charging 5v linear plugged into the battery all the time.

 

But the difference between these two options is not large, so I generally run it with the 2nd option even for critical listening, to reduce the possibility I will discharge the battery too far and damage it..

 

The difference in going from the stock SMPS adapters to a 9v linear is very noticeable to me. Going from using the 9v linear to using a battery that is being charged by a 5v linear is still pretty noticeable, but not as much as the difference in going from the SMPS to 9v linear.

 

In my setup, going from the 9v linear to the battery+5v linear mostly adds sweetness and clarity to the highs. Battery alone is just more sweetness and clarity.

 

I also have two battery + charging linear adapter setups, one for both the sending and receiving FMCs, but generally only hook up battery power to the receiving FMC at the player/DAC end. I haven't spent as much time comparing powering only the receiving FMC on a charging battery against doing the same with both FMCs, but the times I have I did not hear a lot of difference. BUT the system has changed for the better with the Uptone Audio LPS-1s, so I need to re-do those comparisons.

 

I hope this clarifies!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Pretty good score for that cost!

 

Yup, very happy for that!

 

This was to setup a network with a fiber segment in my 1st system. Interesting thing is that when I tested the Trendnets in the 2nd system, my impression was that it sounded a bit better with them over the TPLink ones, even using the stock SMPSs. I need to determine how tolerant the Trendnet ones are to different input voltages (the TPLink easily tolerate 5v-10v in) so I can identify which linears to use on them and do a proper comparison. It would not surprise me that one might be better than the other.

 

Both of these setups are hardcore tweaky audio playback setups... no other applications running on them, no connection to the internet, and no connection between them (same music library duplicated on both).

 

Later!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Here's the wall wart: DDU050100H4660: Jameco Reliapro : AC to DC Power Supply Wall Adapter Transformer Single Output 5 Volt 1 Amp 5 Watt : Power Supplies & Wall Adapters

 

Here's the adapter: https://www.amazon.com/Conwork-Charger-Adapter-Connector-Multimedia/dp/B01G6EBIZY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1477134390&sr=8-2&keywords=Barrel+jack+to+mini+usb

 

You'll also need this on the other side: https://www.amazon.com/CableDeconn-Volt-Barrel-Power-Cable/dp/B012VLKXKM/ref=pd_sim_23_1?ie=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B012VLKXKM&pd_rd_r=Z3TMWHPJ7MH46G2WTGH7&pd_rd_w=iFwXr&pd_rd_wg=E6WDs&psc=1&refRID=Z3TMWHPJ7MH46G2WTGH7

 

Thanks for answering Austinpop's Q... yup, that's the same adapter I used.

 

On cables, I'm a DIY'er, so 'I don't need no stinking adapters'! I have a personal standard for connectors for various purposes and voltage ranges and cut the adapters' output cables at about 9" and soldered on the appropriate one (Deans 2-pin high current female).

 

I then built-up short adapter cables by soldering on the male version of that Deans 2-pin HC connector to the USB female half of the cable from this adapter I got at Adafruit: https://www.adafruit.com/products/1620 . I got these thinking they were full USB adapters with an inline switch on the power lines... I missed the fine print, but they were great here. One can use any USB->Micro USB cable from here to the TeckNet pack, I used short ones I had around.

 

On the output side I already had some of the male versions of the connector above adapted to the appropriate barrel jacks for the TPLinks. I just took the other half of the cable out of the Adafruit adapter and soldered it to a female Deans 2-pin HC.

 

On a pure audio application, I would have used less connectors, but my experience is that it is less critical in this type of application.

 

If anyone wants to try the Ethernet isolator route, there is a seller currently on eBay with used Baaske isolators. Asking US$69 each and accepting offers. Some of us are using EMO and some Baaske, both seem to be effective.

 

Found 'em, just had my offer accepted, very curious how the two solutions compare AND if they compliment each other.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Had my offer accepted too. It will be interesting to see how the two approaches stack up!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

My Baaske Isolator plus ferrite beaded isolation cable came in today. Popped it in tonight, after 2 swaps in and out and 5 minutes I bought another. Nope, not sufficient testing to isolate what is making things sound less 'course' yet more dynamic with the isolator and isolation cable in. AND I have not tried to compare passive filtering versus optical. But it was a clear improvement... I made sure my offer for a 2nd one (for an upgrade to my other system) was accepted before I posted.

 

Any news on yours Austinpop?

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Thanks

 

Thx Jud.

 

Theo, great to hear from you. I added the Baaske between the player computer (in your case your uRendu, in this case an R-Pi) and a FMC-based optical network segment, which provides VERY good isolation from the upstream computer with no impact on network quality and a significant improvement in sound quality.

 

For that I used two of these FMCs from Amazon:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0034CMZIG/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

one of these cables also from Amazon:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000067SCD/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

and two of these power supplies from Jameco to replace the supplied SMPS adapters on the FMCs:

 

https://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&productId=1953639

 

For slightly better sound instead of two of these, on the FMC at the computer I am currently using this battery from Amazon to power it:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FAU7ZB2/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o09_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

And I charge the battery all the time with this adapter instead:

 

https://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&productId=168605

 

While I DIY'd the cables for this, jcn3 nicely provided these two links for appropriate adapter cables:

 

Here's the adapter: https://www.amazon.com/Conwork-Charger-Adapter-Connector-Multimedia/dp/B01G6EBIZY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1477134390&sr=8-2&keywords=Barrel+jack+to+mini+usb

 

You'll also need this on the other side: https://www.amazon.com/CableDeconn-Volt-Barrel-Power-Cable/dp/B012VLKXKM/ref=pd_sim_23_1?ie=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B012VLKXKM&pd_rd_r=Z3TMWHPJ7MH46G2WTGH7&pd_rd_w=iFwXr&pd_rd_wg=E6WDs&psc=1&refRID=Z3TMWHPJ7MH46G2WTGH7

 

The two FMCs WILL both work with 5VDC adapters instead of 9VDC adapters for direct powering due to the type of regulator in the units. BUT some have reported they sound better with 9VDC instead of 5VDC when powered from an adapter. That makes me think that a higher voltage battery setup might be better too, but I am VERY happy with the improvements I got from the FMC + Baaske filter setup and I am not terribly inclined to spend more time tweaking my network setup now... I have other fish to fry!

 

Later!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

I had a "noise sniffer" type piece (amplifies noise) in my system when I tried the Baaske upon first getting it, so the difference it made in reducing noise was very evident.

 

lmitche I know thinks the EMO Systems isolators are even more effective, though they are more expensive.

 

My understanding is that putting these isolators in series should be additive. Given the cost difference, If I wanted to try to take it up a notch, I'd be inclined to get 2-3 of the Baaske to put in series before springing for an EMO. Maybe it would be better, maybe not. But I'm sufficiently happy with my FMC/Baaske combo that I'm going to go work on other areas of my systems now.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Greg, Larry,

 

I still need to get back to my comparisons, but I was wondering: do you both also apply isolation in the USB chain?

 

I did my FMC isolation first before getting into the USB side, and I get the sense the magnitude of SQ improvement on network isolation has gone down with the addition of USB isolation.

 

I will double check if I can. Also, I didn't consider adding the Baaske upstream of the FMC. Will try that too.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

No USB in my computer audio setups, I use a network fed Raspberry Pi running Squeezelite and connected to one of several different I2S-connected DACs... some decidedly low-end, some pushing into pretty good territory.

 

Sorry, can't offer any assistance on USB!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Hey folks,

 

So I finally had some more time last night to try out the Baaske in various configurations.

 

Net net - for me, on my system, the Baaske does not make an audible impact. I stress the phrase on my system because of the context in the next paragraph.

 

As the OP, I've posted my personal journey toward overall isolation up-thread, in some detail. My current playback chain is in my signature, but this journey has taken many steps. I mention this because network isolation using fiber was the first step I took. At the time, replacing a straight Ethernet wire to my Aries Mini with a FMC-fiber-FMC isolator made a - what I remember to be - very noticeable improvement in SQ.

 

Since then, I've taken several more steps on the isolation journey, on both USB and power:

1. A dedicated 20A AC line
   
2. Added PS Audio PowerPort outlet
   
3. Added PS Audio P5 PerfectWave Regenerator to replace my Dectet
   
4. Upgraded power cables
   
5. Added W4S Recovery
   
6. Added Intona Industrial
   
7. Upgraded USB cables
   

The point of this clarification is to inform my latest findings while evaluating the Baaske for network isolation. The baseline for my network isolation comparisons is with FMCs in place, both powered by Tecknet bateries.

 

My findings:

<SNIP>

Rajiv in Austin

 

Rajiv,

 

Many thanks. AND I think you've done us all a great service in highlighting a key and critical set of truths about audio in general and computer audio in spades... the way things work together in a given system is a complex set of interactions and the impact of a change that produces positive results in one system MAY produce very different results in another.

 

The main commonality between our systems is that we "have computers on a network connected to devices producing music". Not much else is the same. And the things you've done since first adding the FMC leg to your system should have produced the results you heard (IMHO), especially the Intona Industrial.

 

In a similar way I am looking forward to trying the new R-Pi isolator HATs coming out in the near future. I just wish someone would come out with a uRendu equivalent to the R-Pi... equivalent HW that has the same HW architecture (for compatibility), but is designed and implemented from a digital audio perspective with good regulators and power and ground realms.

 

Finally, another thing I learn again and again is recheck your setup as you evolve it over time.... what was the cat's meow a few months ago may not be needed or even be a hindrance today!

 

Greg in Mississippi

 

P.S. And if you want to sell your Baaske, drop me a PM!

[gstew]

Does $29 cover 2 FMC units or just 1?

 

$29 each, so $58 for 2. You can also check for used ones at Amazon, I recently saw some at $26 with Prime shipping.

 

I also have some TrendNet ones I got on Amazon for $15 each used. On first try these seemed to produce slightly better SQ in my setup than the TPLink. But looking inside of them I see a regulator chip that I haven't been able to find good info on yet. The TrendNet ones come with 7.5v SMPS adapters, but until I can confirm the parameters of that chip, I can't say if they will work with either the 9v Jameco linear adapter OR the 5v Tecknet battery. Of course the TrendNet ones will work with a 7.5v linear supply BUT one would have to DIY it (or find it elsewhere, likely for a lot more $) as Jameco does not make a 7.5v linear regulated adapter. And with both the Jameco linear supply being so inexpensive yet working well AND the alternative 5v Tecknet battery working so well even when being charged, unless one can DIY a 7.5v supply, the TrendNet does not end up being a less expensive option than the TPLink.

 

I DO NOT recommend using the stock SMPS adapters on the FMCs, ESPECIALLY ON THE receiving side (next to your DAC or uRendu or whatever). In my setup the positive impact is much better with linear supplies here (or if one is VERY flush, an Uptone Audio LPS-1 would work well here too!).

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Thanks Greg. I may buy some Telegartner Ethernet connectors which come in lots of 10. If I have some extras you want some?

 

Sure, thanks! Just let me know how much.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

OK, so since I won't really get to try this until next week, let me start a running list of suggestions. Feel free to add. If you do, please retain the original list, so the list is cumulative. I won't promise to try all suggestions, but I am always open to the great ideas you guys have!

 

Rajiv's HW Assignment

<SNIP>

[*]Use the LPS-1 to power the downstream FMC instead of the Teralink. ( @scan80269 )

<SNIP>

Thanks!

 

I should mention that I have tried 4 LPS-1s in a configuration where I started at:

 

A. Initial setup

1. Downstream FMC powered from Teknet battery with Jameco 5v Linear Adapter charging and plugged into the same outlet as the P10
   
2. R-Pi player powered from a DIY K&K Linear PS also plugged into the same outlet as the P10
   
3. Kali Reclocker powered from a DIY Linear PS powered from the P10
   
4. Seriously modified Mamboberry R-Pi HAT DAC powered from another DIY Linear PS powered from the P10
   

 

Then installed 2 LPS-1s:

 

B. 1st LPS-1 setup

1. Downstream FMC powered from Teknet battery with Jameco 5v Linear Adapter charging and plugged into the same outlet as the P10
   
2. R-Pi player powered from a DIY K&K Linear PS also plugged into the same outlet as the P10
   
3. Kali Reclocker powered from an LPS-1
   
4. Seriously modified Mamboberry R-Pi HAT DAC powered from an LPS-1
   

 

Added the 3rd LPS-1

 

C. 2nd LPS-1 setup

1. Downstream FMC powered from Teknet battery with Jameco 5v Linear Adapter charging and plugged into the same outlet as the P10
   
2. R-Pi player powered from an LPS-1
   
3. Kali Reclocker powered from an LPS-1
   
4. Seriously modified Mamboberry R-Pi HAT DAC powered from an LPS-1
   

 

And finally the 4th LPS-1:

 

D. 3nd LPS-1 setup

1. Downstream FMC powered from an LPS-1
   
2. R-Pi player powered from an LPS-1
   
3. Kali Reclocker powered from an LPS-1
   
4. Seriously modified Mamboberry R-Pi HAT DAC powered from an LPS-1
   

 

Going from the 1st 'all linear PS' setup to the 2nd '2 LPS-1' setup produced a very significant positive difference. Most would call it huge!

 

Going from the 2nd to the '3 LPS-1' setup produced a much smaller difference that while was totally positive after some time listening to it, sounded a bit less dynamic and exciting at first.

 

Going from the 3rd to the '4 LPS-1' setup didn't make much difference in my setup and to my ear. A tiny bit cleaner, but not by much and definitely not justifying adding an LPS-1 just for the FMC.

 

Note that all LPS-1s were powered from separate DIY linear supplies plugged into a separate AC circuit in that room.

 

Your experience will likely be different because my setup is so different than anyone else's here, but I do wonder if powering the FMC from the sole LPS-1 in a system will make much of a difference.

 

Of course, maybe it is the addition of each LPS-1 that makes the difference and if I started with the FMC and worked forward, I'd get the big difference at first with diminishing returns later. Sorry, no time to try that now, need to solder/drill/assemble some more DIY projects (the ones I REALLY got LPS-1 #2 & #3 for)!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

<SNIP>

I then open the tplink and check the supply.

There first a DC/DC switching converter with possibly an huge noisy output, followed by a CMOS regulator with 0,2mv output noise.

 

I conclude that TP link possibly does nothing that generating a "clean digital noise" upstream the server, with an artficial sound stage enhancement.

 

Only the way its iner supply is built makes sypplying it with lps1 a no sense.

 

(and i was wrong)

 

<SNIP>

 

I have both Trendnet and TPLink FMCs along with several Baaske Ethernet filters. I did perceive an improvement with the FMCs powered by linear supplies and additional improvements adding the Baaske, but I have not tried the Baaske along.

 

I too spent some time opening the FMCs and found the same as you did... in another thread (http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/optical-network-configurations-24641/index28.html#post582630) I said

 

"...the TPLinks use a 34063 switching step-up/step-down regulator as the main regulator for 3.3v... that's why it works on 5v-9v (spec for the device is 3v-40v!). That feeds some of the chips directly, but also feeds a couple of RT9166A linear regulators, one producing 2.5v and the other 1.2v. A handy DIY'er COULD LIKELY bypass the 34063 and feed linearly-produced 3.3v directly into the device for some additional power supply noise reduction. If the Trendnet device is the way to go for me, I'll report on how it's power setup is configured after I receive them."

 

Since writing this I've been inside of my Trendnet units too and found the same regulator.

 

At some point I'll DIY small regulators to bypass the 34063s & see what difference that makes.

 

Interesting results, can you point to or PM info on the configuration changes you did to your SBT? I have one and have NEVER used it, going forward with R-Pi's running Squeezelite. Now I'm curious how it will sound configured like yours and powered by an LPS-1.

 

TIA

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

The B772D at Q3 is a bipolar PNP transistor that is part of a switching regulator circuit, with the SOIC-8 chip at U3 being the switching controller. In my MC-210CS, U3 is a 34063 switching controller. The RT9166A are low-dropout linear regulators downstream from the switcher, and generate 2.5V and 1.2V respectively.

 

RT9166A is not particularly low noise, but replacements may be tricky to find due to the very low dropout spec. If the switcher generates 3.3V (needs confirmation) then a replacement for RT9166A needs to have similarly low dropout voltage (and same pinout) or it will not work. The switcher can be replaced like fob69 did.

 

I looked inside my TrendNet TFC-1000MGA FMC, and found a G5752A switching controller and a LD1117 LDO regulator. It looks like these FMCs have only one switching regulator in their designs, along with one or more linear regulators.

 

Thanks scan80269, that was what I was going to say about the devices in the TPLink, but you were faster.

 

IMHO, I would not consider any upgrades to the linear regulators in these units to be an important area to address. I think the best plan of attack is to:

 

1. Provide good, fairly quiet power to the unit. A Jameco cheapy linear adapter is what I'd consider the minimum. A better linear or battery is better, but possibly overkill. I definitely did not hear a significant difference powering my downstream TPLink with an Uptone Audio LPS-1.

 

2. Replace the switching regulator (34063) with a linear reg as fob69 did. Again IMHO, I would consider the TPS7A4700-based regulator he used as overkill, I plan to use a much more pedestrian LT3080 or LT3083 when I try this.

 

3. Track down the power feeds to the main 3.3v & 2.5v consuming chips and add small local reservoir caps at each.

 

Rationale?

 

For #1, I've gone through some lengths to reduce noise on my home's electrical circuits... LED and fluorescent lights only in locations that will generally be off, no dimmers, clamp on chokes on every potentially noisy appliance or otherwise plugged in gadget, even replacing my phone chargers with Jameco 5v linear regulated adapters. ALL of my audio gear is powered by linear supplies. So I am not going to add a potentially noisy SMPS adapter to power the unit.

 

For #2, every time I've replaced a potentially noisy SMPS or switching regulator in a piece of equipment connected to my audio setups, I've gotten good gains. Most marked improvement was replacing 3 DC-DC switching regulators in my Sony HAP Z1-ES with linear regulators... biggest SQ improvement in a fairly extensive mod regime to the unit.

 

For #3, I've had good experiences with adding local reservoir caps in digital circuits. I really should engineer these solutions, but brute force has worked ok so far.

 

BUT this is a piece of network gear with a transformer-isolated connection to my music player computer. While I do say 'Everything Matters!', some things matter more than others. Beyond this and possibly upgrading my Ethernet cables, I'd be inclined to spend any additional effort on that music player, the interface between it and the DAC, and the DAC.

 

And it may just be that Fob69 (and some others who have offered opinions here) are right AND for as attractive as the thought of an optical network link to fully break any ground connection between our source computer and our playback setup may sound, fully passive filtering may be best. In my setup so far, I've gotten my best results with a combination of both. I am becoming keenly aware that computer audio setups are fiendishly complex and what is best in one setup may not be in the next.

 

But all of that is a very long-winded way to say that I doubt replacing the RT9166A with a lower-noise regulator will make much difference... I suspect there is much lower hanging fruit here.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Greg, I'm completely aligned with your recommendations. My friend also questioned the value of replacing the RT9166A. The switcher inside the box is worth replacing, as otherwise it would be a bit silly to have an external linear supply feed into the internal switcher.

 

I'm planning a similar exercise for a Netgear FS105v3 Fast Ethernet switch. I have a Teradak X1/X2 8.5V 1A linear power supply on order to replace the stock Netgear SMPS wall wart. I plan to do some mods for this Teradak LPS as well: replace the silicon rectifiers with power Schottky and maybe the electrolytics with Nichicon UHW or Panasonic FR. Since the FS105v3 is quite cheap, I'll use one as a guinea pig for the LDO regulator mod.

 

I have two of the TPS7A4700 boards on order: one for FS105v3 and another for TrendNet TFC-1000MGA FMC. Once these mods are completed I'll schedule another listening session at my friend's place to assess the SQ benefits. The sonic advantage of external LPS replacing SMPS for the FS105 switch was more or less confirmed during two previous listening sessions. Being SMPS free as much as possible in the audio chain definitely makes sense.

 

Sounds like a fun set of projects. I'll be very curious to hear about your results. One suggestion... try the network gear reg upgrades first and power them with a stock Teradak LPS first, listen, then upgrade the Teradak and and repeat. I'm curious to hear your take on how the quality of the LPS impacts the sound.

 

My networking stuff is all pretty basic at this time, besides the all-linear supplies, the FMC segment, and the Baaske filters. I DO need to get into the gear and root out all of the switching regs, but duplicating my upstairs DAC power supplies and networking setups for my other system, finishing a couple of long-overdue DAC projects, and getting my better vinyl setups running all come first.

 

Also, I need to correct something I said earlier:

 

<SNIP>

ALL of my audio gear is powered by linear supplies. So I am not going to add a potentially noisy SMPS adapter to power the unit.

<SNIP>

 

ALL of my audio gear is NOT powered by linear supplies, just the low-level components (including my music source computer). ALL of the amps I currently have running use SMPSs to pretty good effect. I'd prefer linears there too, but the price-performance of SMPSs for amps is currently pretty high... and a 180 Euro Hypex SMPS is a whole different world from the gimme SMPS wall warts provided with most consumer-level network gear nowadays.

 

I do have some linear-supplied amps cued up for refurbishment AFTER I get these other projects complete.

 

I apologize for mis-stating this!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

I have a question! Have anyone tried FMCs from a wireless AC extender to a streamer? I am wondering if this might be a good idea or not?

BTW. I use TP-Link powerbanks 6700mAh Vivid Series 6700mAh Ultra Compact Power Bank - TP-Link for my casual listening setup (powering Muzo Cobblestone) and are quite impressed by their powerbank. They are without any voltage converters and uses Panasonic Li-ion batteries. Have anyone tried them to power the downstream FMC?

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

Cornan,

 

Thanks for the tip on the TPLink powerbanks. I'll get one to try.

 

I am curious why you say there are no voltage converters in them.

 

First, with the voltage of a Li-ion cell being 3.7v-4.2v and this unit accepting 5v in and putting 5v out, there has to be some voltage conversion.

 

Second, the nice internal picture on the TPLink product page for the unit clearly shows an MP2636 Single Cell Switch-Mode Battery Charger chip as the main controlling chip

 

The first fits my definition of needing a voltage converter and the second fits my definition of one.

 

Am I missing something?

 

Greg in Mississippi

 

P.S. Can these units be used while charging, like the TeckNet ones?

 

P.P.S. I'm not saying the unit is bad because of the controller chip. Since these FMCs generally seem to use a switching regulator as the main regulator, they are going to have some switching noise on the power unless you modify them with linear regs. Even with that, using a clean power supply is better than a dirty one. BUT I want to be clear if this unit is really doing something other than what I think it does.

[gstew]

Hi Greg,

 

You are welcome!

Sorry for not being clear. You are not missing anything. What I ment was that there is just one USB outlet (not 2 or more as you usually see on powerbanks) and no additional voltage regulators that would make the powerbank a bad choise IMO. Also, I think that the batteries are LG and not Panasonic BTW. I bought it for roughly $20 at a local store so I think it is a bargain.

 

That was quite a bargain, I'm seeing them anywhere from $36-$50 USD.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

Greg in Mississippi

 

P.P.S. Also, can the TPLink powerbank be used while simultaneously being charged, like the TeckNet ones?

[gstew]

@gstew, as you are infinitely more knowledgeable about this stuff than me, do you have an opinion on whether the TPLink or TeckNet battery is better? I want to pull the trigger on one to use on my FMC or even Sungxer SU-1 DDC. Thank you so much for helping to bestow your knowledge on a modest plebian such as myself.

 

LOL, looks like my smart-person facade is working! Bwaaahaaahaaa, next to take over the world!!!!

 

Tboooe, I hope to be able to tell you which would be better in a week or so, I do have the TPLink one ordered.

 

I suggest you take AustinPop up on his most generous offer and I'll be able to let you know if I prefer one over the other not long after you receive the loaner.

 

OTOH, I start with being a little skeptical about there being much difference between them. As commodity-level supplies, they will likely use similar or even the same chipsets. Likely neither has much in the way of noise-suppression on the output. I doubt any difference in batteries will matter much after going through the on-board control/regulation chips AND the switching regulator on the FMC. AND the network signal goes through both an output and an input transformer before it gets to your downstream box.

 

I am frankly surprised I can hear a difference between one of these and an OK linear supply. Then after all of that, I was just as surprised that I didn't hear much difference using an Uptone Audio LPS-1 powering the downstream FMC... those supplies have made huge differences on just about everywhere else I've tried them.

 

I really need to make some time to poke around in one of my FMCs and modify it as fob69 did, but other projects beckon.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Hah! Didn't realize they were cheaper than the Gigabit ones, which were like $45ish each.

 

Or check out the TrendNet TFC-110MSC used on Amazon @ about $20 ea with shipping.

 

I found your results from your testing so far VERY interesting. I'd mentioned I did not get a large difference trying an LPS-1 on my downstream FMC. OTOH, that was in a setup where 3 other LPS-1s were already making significant diffs... and now I need to retry that test starting with everything back on linear supplies and putting an LPS-1 on the FMC first.

 

The setup was a modified Mamboberry R-Pi DAC hat on a Kali I2S reclocker on a Pi. All three of these were powered by separate LPS-1s and adding a fourth to power the FMC really didn't make much of a difference.

 

Now I'm very curious how your setup would fare with 2-3 LPS-1s. Bet you are too!

 

And if you unplugged or un-powered the Meanwell from your P5 when you tried powering the LPS-1 with a linear supply, I now suspect moving the Meanwell power to another outlet on another circuit will not make much if any of a diff... but once you get an appropriate extension cord, it is an easy one to try, so I say still go for it!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

OK - just getting set for another round of experiments over the weekend, and thought I'd let you know what I'm planning.

 

<SNIP>

Here's my list. The baseline against which to compare will be the above topology.

<SNIP>

• Plug the power supplies for energizing the LPS-1's, the ethernet switch, and the upstream FMC into another AC circuit than your P5 ( @gstew )
  

As usual, feel free to add ideas to try. Stay tuned.

 

Rajiv,

 

I love your system diagram and have been meaning to do some of mine (some because I have 2 systems and several configurations for both).

 

This one shows how I've configured my AC power to separate dirty (currently pre-Fiber networking cable) from my 'clean-ish' side... I say 'clean-ish' because the R-Pi and receiving FMC are still computers with processing causing noise AND both have switching regulators on-board, also causing noise. Still, getting the other computer and network components both separated via the fiber network cable link AND on a different AC circuit make some difference in my setup... not night and day, but definitely worth the extension cord and clutter.

 

This is my simplest configuration for this system that plays music files via a computer and the simplest I have close to yours:

 

 

I first tried something like this way back in the '90s when I was doing a radical rebuild of a Magnavox CDP-650 somewhat based on the Walt Jung POOGE articles from Audio Amateur. To the revised output stages, I added a bunch of local high-quality regulators along with several massive power supplies with one set dedicated to the digital side (CD drive through digital filter) and the other set to the analog side (DAC to RCAs), with the two sides having separate AC cables.

 

I had also been planning dedicated AC lines for the system and wanted to have one set of lines for analog circuits and the other for digital and/or noisier ones like a turntable motor.

 

While one does this at their own risk, using the two separate circuits for the two sides of the CD player's supplies DID result in a worthwhile improvement.

 

Then in 2007-2008, when setting up my first computer-sourced music player, I followed the cMP/cPlay formula created by a guy with the moniker of cics. This setup used motherboard-based hardware with the output generally taken from a Juli@ PCI sound card or something similar (S/PDIF, TOSLINK, analog, or I2S).

 

In a similar fashion to my DIY'd CD player's separate analog and digital supplies, he recommended separate computer power supplies with one for the P4 processor connection and other dirty circuits and the other for the rest of the motherboard and sound card with the 'dirty' supply pulled into a separate AC circuit than the rest of your system. I tried this, found a noticeable difference, and have continued to implement versions of the configuration as my setups have evolved. I do occasionally try plugging everything together on one circuit and have always heard a drop in sound quality when I do.

 

Very curious if it makes a difference in your setup.

 

Later!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Hey Rajiv,

 

Hi Greg,

 

That's a very cool diagram. I like the way you've delineated your isolation boundaries. Nice!

 

 

I'm glad you liked it. I've updated it with more info... attached.

 

 

 

I think I was actually doing this experiment when you posted! Rather than wait on a full update, why don't I give my findings now. I've started on the LPS-1 experiments, but those are still in progress.

 

Methodology

 

<SNIP>

 

Interesting results and surely not what I expected. However, it led to you finding another avenue for improvement, which is what we're doing here, so definitely a success!!!

 

But then...

 

 

Greg - since you have the P5's big brother the P10, I'd like to suggest you take your "dirty" supplies in your picture and try attaching them to the P10, either directly or via a power strip. I would love to know what you find.

 

So I tried this yesterday in both systems. I'll post a diagram of my other system in the system topology thread later this week, but it is a simpler one with a Sony HAP Z1-ES feeding a DIY'd passive shunt attenuator into a couple of Hypex NC400 monoblocks which power a pair of Eminent Technology LFT-IV.

 

My mods to the Sony focused on better power supplies and regulators and signal components in the single-ended output path, but included splitting the AC input into 2, one to the transformer for the clocks / DAC / analog stages and the other to transformer for all of the control / display / SSD / processor/DSP stages. This is one where I've tried going back and forth between having them both into the P10 and then back into separate circuits.

 

Results here were 'interesting'. Now that people are reporting what they hear with reducing AC leakage loops, I could hear similar improvements in bass definition and high-end focus. BUT the middle mids upwards became more prominent (what I attribute to increased digital noise) and ultimately I preferred the 2 circuit configuration.

 

My next set of mods to it will focus on further improving the digital power supplies which should lower digital noise AND going to a no-OpAmp output stage setup which should make it more immune to the effects of digital noise. Both sides plugged into the P10 may be better then.

 

Then on my main system I tried plugging my dirty power extension into the P10 in that setup. Results here were also 'interesting', but more definitive... I could not hear any describable quantitative differences between both setups... I would not say the highs or mids or lows changed, but I do need to do this again while fresher. BUT the musicality of the playback suffered in the area of PRAT, emotive communication, and drive... with the dirty AC plugged into the P10, the music was wooden and mechanical sounding. It was exciting and interesting with it plugged into a separate circuit.

 

Do note that this put MUCH MORE into my P10 than your test... computer and all my networking gear. I'll try it again at some point with just the upstream FMC power into the P10, which is more like what you tried.

 

As I and others have said before on this forum and others, results with computer audio can be VERY system and setup dependent!

 

Also, I should add that plugging the dirty AC side into the P10 in both systems resulted in a perceived increase in the sound level. Don't ask me, I have no explanation for that at all!

 

Greg in Mississippi

 

P.S. I'll send you some notes on some optimizations I did on my P10's privately.

[gstew]

Well, I have spent a couple of days comparing off and on between my baseline FMCs (MC200CM) and the 100Mbps FMCs that recently arrived (MC100CM).

 

The results are puzzling.

 

Starting again from this topology:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]31693[/ATTACH]

 

Experiment

 

Hold everything constant. For each of the pair of MC200CM's in my chain, swap them out with the MC100CM, using the exact same cables and power supplies. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the FMCs auto negotiate to 100Mbps with my Gb switch and (presumably, since I can't monitor this) the Aries Mini.

 

Impressions

 

In my system, the MC200CM (Gbps) sounds much better. With the MC100CM, the soundstage collapses, flattens, everything sounds more recessed, and instruments lose their dimensionality.

 

This was puzzling to me for two reasons:

1. First, because @scan80269 had found 100Mbps to improve the sound
   
2. I expected any difference, if any, to be small at best.
   

 

I have gone back and forth several times to confirm, and indeed, in my system my findings hold.

 

Possible Explanations

 

None - only speculations.

 

First, I don't recall if scan's finding were specifically with the Aries Mini, or just the Aries and mRendu. Second, you'll recall I found the magic spot for the LPS-1 in my chain to be powering the downstream FMC. Perhaps the new FMC has different or additional ground leakage that is not being mitigated by the LPS-1.

 

Anyone want to buy a couple of MC100CM's and a Netgear FS105 off me?

 

Rajiv,

 

Very interesting! Yup, gotta listen and be prepared that it might not work as expected in your setup... you are VERY good at that, not everyone is.

 

Some thoughts...

 

1. Unless the MC100CMs are used, break them in for at least a week and try again. Best to put them somewhere that won't impact your system's sound. Then you can just use the included SMPS's. Also best to put them where they will be 'exercised' with some network traffic.

 

2. Of course go back and retry the LPS-1 on your RUR instead of your FMC.

 

3. As I understand 'leakage loops' as described by JS & AC, an LPS-1 absolutely stops the loop for the affected unit as long as it is the only power supply to the unit, which describes these FMCs. I mention this as some of my setups could have a portion of a piece of gear powered by an LPS-1 and the rest via an AC-connected supply... and there would still be a leakage loop via the AC connected power supply.

 

4. It does sound as though scan80269 has access to or owns both an Aries Mini and Femto... see these two comments:

 

Auralic Aries Mini - Page 50

 

Auralic Aries & Sonore microRendu listening impressions - Page 6

 

5. Have you diagrammed the rest of your network or described it somewhere. That MIGHT be contributing... just a guess.

 

I'm hoping scan80269'll chime in soon with his ideas too.

 

Thanks for this! Another data point is ALWAYS good!

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

<SNIP>

Also, the MC100CM came with 4 DIP switches, and I set them all to the "UP" position (the default). Finally, I looked at my switch to which the upstream FMC is connected. It's a Gb switch (Dlink), but the port had the 100Mb LED on. <SNIP>

 

So I have not listened to see if there's any difference between the possible settings... Heck, I forgot they were even there!

 

But the switches on my MC100CMs are set to UP - DOWN - UP - DOWN.

 

That sets it to:

 

#1 - TP_AUTO, auto negotiate mode.

 

#2 - TP_10M, 10Base-T mode.

 

#3 - TP-FDX, Full-Duplex mode.

 

#4 - Link Fault Pass Through function enable.

 

I will try the default setting at some point over the holiday week and see if it makes a difference.

 

Greg in Mississippi

[gstew]

Rajiv,

 

<SNIP>

 

@scan80269 's comments and thoughts.

 

Reading his response, he used his switch to force his Femto to 100Mbps, had problems with that rate on his Aries Mini, AND has no FMCs... so somewhat of a different situation. I'm not saying it won't apply to your setup, but it may not, which is consistent with your observations.

 

Hmm - that looks like you set it to 10Mbps, which is too low. Not sure about switch #4, though

 

Curious, why is 10Mbps too low? Limitations in the Aries Mini? Too low of a badwidth for streaming (I don't stream anything, so am definitely not an expert here).

 

It works ok with my decidedly LOW-end Raspberry Pi players.

 

Also, I went through the options with the switches this weekend and ended up back with what I reported before. I was rather surprised about the results. I expected non-Auto-Negotiate, Half-Duplex, and Link-Fault Pass-Through off all to be positives.

 

 

Yes, I did this recently. Here it is:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]31764[/ATTACH]

 

Thanks for this. That helps a LOT.

 

You have a lot going on in your network. IMHO, audio setups are best when as dedicated as possible. AND while I don't know much about network protocols and functionality, I wonder if other traffic through your network MIGHT be skewing your results.

 

A set of tests to try... I assume your local music is on the Synology and that you do stream some, but not as a key audiophile source. If that all is so, try your system after isolating your audio setup from the other network gear and internet traffic by:

 

1. Disconnecting the Baaske Isolator to Router link
    
   
2. Connecting the Cat 6 going to the D-Link DGS-2208 directly to the Synology NAS
    
   
3. Disconnecting the link to the D-Link DGS-2205
    
   
4. Moving the downstream end of the ~80ft Cat5 from the D-Link DGS-2205 to directly into the receiving FMC
   

 

At that point you have about as clean of a setup as you can have without moving a LOT of your gear around. I'd suggest listening to hear if you perceive any differences at that point, then re-trying your LPS-1 locations and GB/100Mbps FMC trials.

 

Also if you decide to try this consider trying the Baaske between your downstream FMC & your Aries Mini.*

 

And if this makes a difference, this may point to some further optimizations that could preserve the improvements with your full network. You'd need to engage some of the more network-knowledgeable for suggestions here.

 

 

 

Then I've seen your comments about getting an adapter to try your Aries Mini with 2 LPS-1's in series (14v/1.1A) AND also power your upstream FMC at the same time. I thought about this a bit, then looked for some useful info and analysis on that. What I found was:

 

1. Alex Crespi's comments on powering an Aries Mini with 2 LPS-1s: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-and-sonore-microrendu-listening-impressions-29351/index5.html#post614825 and http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f27-uptone-audio-sponsored/ultracap%99-linear-power-supply-1-operation-and-pre-purchase-thread-30173/index5.html#post615780
    
   
2. Your comment on the power requirements of the Aries Mini: UltraCap™ LPS-1 Operation and Pre-purchase thread - Page 8
    
   
3. John Swenson's comments on powering multiple devices from an LPS-1: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f26-sonore-sponsored/sonore-microrendu-power-supply-unit-observations-considerations-and-commentary-28480/index12.html#post606200
    
   
4. John Swenson's comments on powering a uRendu and an FMC from a single LPS-1: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f27-uptone-audio-sponsored/ultracap%99-linear-power-supply-1-troubleshooting-system-grounding-etc-30196/index3.html#post612938
   

 

Reading all of these I came away first with these thoughts...

 

 

1. 2 LPS-1's in series powering your Aries Mini should work ok, shouldn't damage anything if it doesn't, and likely will be a good combo, although with the FMC feeding it ALSO powered by an LPS-1 (to break the leakage loops from the previous equipment PLUS the isolation offered by the fiber link and the transformers at each end of the network links) it may not be better than the Auralic supply (see this post: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-and-sonore-microrendu-listening-impressions-29351/index5.html#post615876)
    
   
2. Related to the above, it would be best to compare the ALL of the various combos of Aries Mini on 2 LPS-1 in series w/FMC on battery or regular linear supply VERSUS Aries Mini on 2 LPS-1 in series w/FMC on a 3rd LPS-1 VERSUS your current setup with Aries Mini on Auralic supply & FMC on a single LPS-1.
    
   

 

Then there is powering BOTH your Aries Mini with 2 LPS-1 in series PLUS your downstream FMC either tapped from one of the series'd LPS-1 or in parallel with the feed to the Aries Mini from the 2 series'd LPS-1s. IMHO, this is an iffy proposition both from a practical standpoint and a performance one. Why?

 

 

1. Practically, just the Aries Mini along is pushing the max current of the LPS-1s in series.
    
   
2. Performance-wise, either configuration of using 2 LPS-1 to power both the Aries Mini and your downstream FMC will result in supply interactions and breaking of isolation.
    
   
3. These effects would IMHO ALMOST SURELY result in poorer performance than powering them with 3 LPS-1.
    
   
4. And these effects IMHO would more likely than not result in poorer performance than either powering the FMC with 1 LPS-1 and the Aries Mini with the Auralic supply OR powering the FMC with a battery or standard linear supply and the Aries Mini with 2 LPS-1 in series.
    
   

 

Of course, you won't know without trying... and I'm willing to be proven wrong with real-world experience, as always.

 

Sorry, a lot to digest here!

 

Greg in Mississippi

 

*P.S. Related, I forgot to mention in my system diagram that I have 4 Baaske in my setup, 3 between my downstream FMC & my R-Pi's, one between my switch and my WiFi router setup as an access point. I DID listen when I put the first Baaske between the FMC & R-Pi's and it was a definite step up, though not as large as the FMCs. I did NOT listen when I put the other 3 in, my intention is to move 2 of the 4 to my 2nd setup once I have duplicated all the power supplies I use for the networking and DIY'd digital sources in my main system, one of my projects this week.

 

And I have seen some comments on the EMOSystems isolators sounding different in one orientation versus the other. I haven't tried this on my Baaske's

 

And in addition to the Baaske's, I have clamp-on ferrite filters on all of my network cables and my impression (without a lot of dedicated listening) was that they were positives too. AND the Baaske's I have all came with a short cable link with a ferrite filter already mounted.