A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming

[Nenon]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

Have you tried the Monoprice Slimrun Fiber USB 3 extension cable?

Not yet, because I am using LVDS I2S over HDMI cable currently. I was stupid enough to think that the Silmrun HDMI extender may work and bought one but had to return it. Working on my USB-based rig... looks promising that I may be able to switch to USB soon. 

I was hoping there would be some feedback on the USB Slimrun extender by now. It's a relatively inexpensive thing to try, easy to return, and also gives you the option to move the computer further away from your audio system, which may be beneficial. 

 

49 minutes ago, Dev said:

Nenon, are you using the A or B side of the eR ? I am perplexed when you say it makes a big difference. I can understand that it can make a difference if both ends (upstream and downstream) are connected to the A side of eR but if one is connected to A and other is connected to B, wouldn't eR isolation/moat reduce the effect of the ethernet cables in general ?

You know, that's interesting actually. I only like using the A-side only and not crossing the moat in a very particular scenario:

- fiber from the eR to my router.

- JCAT Signature Gold ethernet cable to my server.

With the JCAT ethernet cable my Qobuz streaming becomes a lot more transparent. So transparent that I think the 1Gbps on my server (vs. using 100 Mbps) brings more than crossing the moat on the eR. But with any other cable I have tried, I prefer to connect the A-side to my router and the B-side to my server. Very interesting. Of course I can try hardcoding the speed to 100Mbps when using the A-side exclusively, but I haven't had a chance to do that test. 

 

Currently, I am using the B-side as I am testing a Melco switch upstream from the etherRegen.

 

@austinpop is absolutely right! Adding the Melco switch between my router and the etherRegen brings Qobuz streaming to yet another level. 

Currently I have the following network: Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server (one box solution connected directly to the DAC). And that sounds better than without the Melco. 

 

But I have a second Melco(*) switch (more on that in some future posts). So would adding a second Melco switch be even better?

Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --> Melco(*) switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server.

 

Yes! It is better with 3 switches in the chain. The song I used for A/B comparison was even more enjoyable with the chain of 3 switches. 

 

Is it worth doing that? IMO - no.

Does it ever end? NO!

 

 

[Dev]

10 minutes ago, Nenon said:

You know, that's interesting actually. I only like using the A-side only and not crossing the moat in a very particular scenario:

- fiber from the eR to my router.

- JCAT Signature Gold ethernet cable to my server.

With the JCAT ethernet cable my Qobuz streaming becomes a lot more transparent. So transparent that I think the 1Gbps on my server (vs. using 100 Mbps) brings more than crossing the moat on the eR. But with any other cable I have tried, I prefer to connect the A-side to my router and the B-side to my server. Very interesting. Of course I can try hardcoding the speed to 100Mbps when using the A-side exclusively, but I haven't had a chance to do that test. 

 

Currently, I am using the B-side as I am testing a Melco switch upstream from the etherRegen.

 

@austinpop is absolutely right! Adding the Melco switch between my router and the etherRegen brings Qobuz streaming to yet another level. 

Currently I have the following network: Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server (one box solution connected directly to the DAC). And that sounds better than without the Melco. 

 

But I have a second Melco(*) switch (more on that in some future posts). So would adding a second Melco switch be even better?

Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --> Melco(*) switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server.

 

Yes! It is better with 3 switches in the chain. The song I used for A/B comparison was even more enjoyable with the chain of 3 switches. 

 

Is it worth doing that? IMO - no.

Does it ever end? NO!

 

 

 

well, looks like you are missing one more audiograde switch in the chain and since you have gone that far, you need to try the OCXO Quad switch from Paul Pang 🙂

 

http://ppaproduct.blogspot.com/2015/07/audio-grade-switcher.html

 

[austinpop]

25 minutes ago, Nenon said:

Is it worth doing that? IMO - no.

Does it ever end? NO!

 

As I said in review, this is a bottomless pit.

 

For most people, a single good switch like the eR with a good PSU is a sensible place to stop. Some might add an oM or second switch, plus another good PSU. Beyond that, it's crazy-town!

[auricgoldfinger]

1 hour ago, Nenon said:

But I have a second Melco(*) switch (more on that in some future posts). So would adding a second Melco switch be even better?

Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --> Melco(*) switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server.

 

What happens if you put the Melco after the etherREGEN?

[matthias]

1 hour ago, Nenon said:

Currently I have the following network: Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server (one box solution connected directly to the DAC). And that sounds better than without the Melco. 

 

Just for clarification:

 

Did you compare in this set-up:

 

1. ER A-side >> JCAT NIC >> server

vs

2. ER B-side >> JCAT NIC >> server

 

BTW, which copper port did you use with the Melco?

 

Thanks

 

Matt

[RickyV]

1 hour ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

What happens if you put the Melco after the etherREGEN?

Or Melco first and go optical to ER, that’s what I am thinking.

[auricgoldfinger]

Just now, RickyV said:

Or Melco first and go optical to ER, that’s what I am thinking.

 

@austinpop and I use SOtM via optical to ER.  In the ER review, he preferred the Melco to the other two switches (when cost is not a factor), so why not try it last in the chain?  Only Uptone says the ER must be last.  I haven't seen anyone test that assertion.

[Ultrarunner]

6 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Small correction: The EtherREGEN does not ship with any SFP transceiver, nor does UpTone sell any SFP modules. Everyone is free to roll their own. 

Sorry. My mistake. I had forgotten that in all my experimenting. 😉

[Ultrarunner]

7 hours ago, guiltyboxswapper said:

 

Not best for ER, certainly much improved on oM+oR but found the planet variants sounded less mechanical with the oM+oR too.

What model would you recommend? Thanks. 

[John769]

5 hours ago, Nenon said:

I was hoping there would be some feedback on the USB Slimrun extender by now.

Tried the USB Slimrun extender in 33ft length. Unfortunately it doesn't work NUC i7 -> RME ADI-2 DAC but does work with the NUC->an old ES9023 USB dongle I have around. The RME says USB (disconnected).

[Nenon]

5 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

What happens if you put the Melco after the etherREGEN?

I could not try that, because the power supply powering the etherREGEN was not 12V, and I did not have a suitable power supply for that purpose. I wonder if @austinpop tried it. 

 

4 hours ago, RickyV said:

Or Melco first and go optical to ER, that’s what I am thinking.

That's what I did. 

6 hours ago, Nenon said:

Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC

The Ubiquity router has a SPF port, but I use it to isolate my WiFi access point, as that seems to inject a lot more noise in my network if connected with copper. It's quite audible in my system if I connect the WiFI access point with copper to the Ubiquity router. It took a lot of trial and error to tame that noise. I always isolate the WiFi via fiber now. 

 

 

4 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

@austinpop and I use SOtM via optical to ER.  In the ER review, he preferred the Melco to the other two switches (when cost is not a factor), so why not try it last in the chain?  Only Uptone says the ER must be last.  I haven't seen anyone test that assertion.

I agree it's a good test to do. I can't do it at the moment due to power supply limitations, but I should be able to do it soon.

 

 

5 hours ago, matthias said:

Did you compare in this set-up:

1. ER A-side >> JCAT NIC >> server

vs

2. ER B-side >> JCAT NIC >> server

My early etherREGN tests (I was lucky to get one from the first batch) did not show any difference between going A-->B or B-->A. But I haven't tested that recently. My network setup is much more resolving now, and I think I need to repeat some of the tests. But my early tests were also more inline with what a typical eR user would be doing. Today's tests with two Melco switches, an eR, and $3,000+ worth of ethernet cables, not to mention all the power supplies, power cords, SR Orange fuses, etc. are a little bit out of the norm. But why not try it while I have all that stuff. I am sending some of it back tomorrow, so today was tha day. 

What I compared was:

1. Router connected to the A-side; server connected to the B-side.

vs.

2. Router and server connected to the A-side.

There is one very specific case where I liked router and server connected to the A-side and not going to the B-side.  And that was the best sounding combination of all. But in most other cases Router to the A-side and server to the B-side sounded best. 

@austinpop has tried many of those tests in his excellent review. But with networking stuff YMMV. 

 

 

[shahed99]

The other day I fired up my system after coming from work. And the sound wasn't the same; it was harsh and fatiguing. I was surprised why it was sounding bad all of a sudden. Then it hit me - the night before I swapped out my fiber connection between my Mikrotik router and SoTm switch with a Supra ethernet cable. But I didn't have time to test the configuration as it was late and went to bed. As soon as I put back my fiber connection - the sound returned; calmer, less harsh retaining the dynamics.

 

I bought the Planet Tech wide temp SFP last week. My single mode fiber cable didn't arrive it. But the single mode Planet SFP worked fine with my existing multimode fiber cable. The improvement was immediate. I noticed a wider soundstage, the sound was even calmer and relaxing. Once I received my single mode cable the next day, I think I noticed further improvement but I'm not sure.

 

I'm using a single mode fiber cable of length 5m. Should I go for a 10m cable as suggested by @Nenon?

[shahed99]

I'm a big believer in optical now since that above experience. In order to completely get rid of ethernet/copper connection, I need to find a suitable replacement of my JCAT NET card. Is there any audiophile grade PCIE optical lan card? I think startech makes one but not sure their quality.

[austinpop]

4 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

@austinpop and I use SOtM via optical to ER.  In the ER review, he preferred the Melco to the other two switches (when cost is not a factor), so why not try it last in the chain?  Only Uptone says the ER must be last.  I haven't seen anyone test that assertion.

 

Despite the review becoming TL;DR for many people, there were sooo many things I didn't try or chose to leave out!

 

Yes, I do think the "best" switch should be last in the chain. I'll try the Melco as the last switch when I get a chance...

[Nenon]

@shahed99 - you can try the Startech PEX1000SFP card that the Extreme uses. 

I am not sure that fiber cables work better everywhere. They change the sound if they are on your streaming path. And it's not just about noise isolation but also quality reclocking, which the JCAT NET Femto does better than the Startech.  

On the 5m cable - I would not worry too much about it. 

[luisma]

On 3/15/2020 at 6:03 AM, ASRMichael said:

Are people using single or multi mode cables? If so why? 

Fiber optics technology has evolved over the years, multimode fiber (MM) was easier to manufacture and less costly that's why it was widely used in the past, with MM you have "light" going through the fiber. Distance you could go with MM fiber is limited considerably, usually the limits were about 550 meters IIRC

Single mode (SM) fiber has come down in cost with new manufacturing more cost effective technologies therefore it is the standard for now and the future, many people, general contractors, architects, project managers etc. will tell you they still use MM but that's is because they really don't know too much of a difference. SM will let you go way farther in distance (miles), with single mode you have a "laser" not light going through the fiber.

The real important thing with this fiber application you are all using is the shielding of the unit, SFP's used and switches used. This is critical to avoid RFI

 

[luisma]

And my advise use normal distance SFP's for single mode (less than 5 miles), the more complex and the more distance the SFP have the more RFI should generate, although shielding could be actually better on those, as a matter of fact I haven't tested those, but I know it will increase the radiated RFI.

 

Stay away from BiDi at all cost, even wider spectrum RFI, use regular dual fibers LC's SFP's

 

Ubiquity is a great brand and very inexpensive

 

Avoid the FMC's (fiber media converters) if possible

 

My 2 cents

 

[darkfrank]

I've been connecting my server to ER's B side and listened for past few months.

After reading Emile's post in wb, I tried to connect my server and router on A side.

OMG, the sound stage opened up a lot , it has more texture and energy then the B side 100M port.

 

I will not go back to B port anymore.

[seeteeyou]

On 3/16/2020 at 4:10 AM, Nenon said:

But I have a second Melco(*) switch (more on that in some future posts). So would adding a second Melco switch be even better?

Cable modem --(copper)--> Ubiquity router --(copper)--> Melco switch --> Melco(*) switch --(fiber)--> (A)etherREGEN(B) --(copper)--> JCAT NIC on the server.

 

Well, didn't @hols (current owner of SGM Extreme) comment that Melco switch → Melco(*) switch → SOtM switch + Habst clock cable + Cybershaft OP21A might have the potential to achieve something that's very close to what SGM Extreme could offer?

 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/melco-s100-audiophile-switch.29828/page-2#post-627616

Quote

And then we came up with the idea of can we do 3 switches to further isolate the HQplayer server from endpoint NAA. And so we added the SOtM as the last switch with the NAA connected to it. And WOW WOW everything just comes out naturally with big and wide soundstage and with very accurate timbre and focus. It is a triple jump in SQ and is the best I have heard from the Linux server system. It actually become very close to SGM extreme though of a different character.

 

Since that industrial grade Planet Technology MGB-TLX (with wide temperature range -40℃ to 75℃) turned out to be a winner while @romaz should be evaluating Telegärtner M12 Gold Switch soon, maybe it's also an interesting experiment to give their Industrial IP67 Rated IGS-5227-6MT-X a try since used ones are available on eBay for $299 or less?

 

https://www.amazon.com/PLANET-Industrial-Managed-Ethernet-IGS-5227-6MT-X/dp/B075JD79VG

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Planet-IGS-5227-6MT-X-Industrial-IP67-rated-6-Port-Gigabit-M12-Ethernet-Switch-/153780775951

https://planetechusa.com/product/igs-5227-6mt-x-industrial-ip67-rated-6-port-10-100-1000t-m12-managed-ethernet-switch/

Quote

Operating Temperature: -40 to 75°C

 

Please take a look at the picture on eBay as well as RTFM, it's indicating that DC 12V could be accepted and here's the M12 connector required for making JSSG DC cables with 15AWG Mundorf SGW115

 

https://planetechusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IGS-5227-6MT-X_Datasheet.pdf#page=6

Quote

1 x M12, 5-pin A-coded male connector

 

We could make our own Ethernet cables that are terminated with X-coded M12 connector on one end, though here's something that's ready to go

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/METZ-CONNECT-142M2X15010-M12-RJ45-ETHERNET-CABLE-IP67-FNOB/183867433128

https://www.metz-connect.com/en/products/142m2x15010

Quote

Cat.6A, 8-pole, X-coded

 

IMHO it's hard to tell why Telegärtner would perform so well according to Emile, did the wide temperature part play a role while having the right male / female connectors might also score some extra points?

 

https://slideplayer.com/slide/5267720/

 

 

[Nenon]

3 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

 

Well, didn't @hols (current owner of SGM Extreme) comment that Melco switch → Melco(*) switch → SOtM switch + Habst clock cable + Cybershaft OP21A might have the potential to achieve something that's very close to what SGM Extreme could offer?

 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/melco-s100-audiophile-switch.29828/page-2#post-627616

 

Since that industrial grade Planet Technology MGB-TLX (with wide temperature range -40℃ to 75℃) turned out to be a winner while @romaz should be evaluating Telegärtner M12 Gold Switch soon, maybe it's also an interesting experiment to give their Industrial IP67 Rated IGS-5227-6MT-X a try since used ones are available on eBay for $299 or less?

 

https://www.amazon.com/PLANET-Industrial-Managed-Ethernet-IGS-5227-6MT-X/dp/B075JD79VG

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Planet-IGS-5227-6MT-X-Industrial-IP67-rated-6-Port-Gigabit-M12-Ethernet-Switch-/153780775951

https://planetechusa.com/product/igs-5227-6mt-x-industrial-ip67-rated-6-port-10-100-1000t-m12-managed-ethernet-switch/

 

Please take a look at the picture on eBay as well as RTFM, it's indicating that DC 12V could be accepted and here's the M12 connector required for making JSSG DC cables with 15AWG Mundorf SGW115

 

https://planetechusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IGS-5227-6MT-X_Datasheet.pdf#page=6

 

We could make our own Ethernet cables that are terminated with X-coded M12 connector on one end, though here's something that's ready to go

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/METZ-CONNECT-142M2X15010-M12-RJ45-ETHERNET-CABLE-IP67-FNOB/183867433128

https://www.metz-connect.com/en/products/142m2x15010

 

IMHO it's hard to tell why Telegärtner would perform so well according to Emile, did the wide temperature part play a role while having the right male / female connectors might also score some extra points?

 

https://slideplayer.com/slide/5267720/

 

 

 

All great ideas. I bookmarked your post and will get to it eventually if no one else does. I have too many other experiments on my plate at the moment. Hopefully someone would listen to you, try one of these switches, and report back. I would have done it in a heartbeat if I did not have so many other things going on. 

 

[guiltyboxswapper]

On 3/16/2020 at 3:26 AM, shahed99 said:

I'm a big believer in optical now since that above experience. In order to completely get rid of ethernet/copper connection, I need to find a suitable replacement of my JCAT NET card. Is there any audiophile grade PCIE optical lan card? I think startech makes one but not sure their quality.

 

I think we need to tread carefully here.  The opticalModule, opticalRendu and ER do some kind of signal regeneration / clean up process.  I imagine other switches are doing similar via reclocking too. 

 

I have tried the off-the-shelf FMCs such as recommended StarTech, not nearly as capable.

[matthias]

7 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

Well, didn't @hols (current owner of SGM Extreme) comment that Melco switch → Melco(*) switch → SOtM switch + Habst clock cable + Cybershaft OP21A might have the potential to achieve something that's very close to what SGM Extreme could offer?

 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/melco-s100-audiophile-switch.29828/page-2#post-627616

 

The setup of @hols is a typical setup with NAA as endpoint.

 

For comparison @romaz for example always prefered his Extreme to ANY setup with an endpoint even when his Extreme was either server or endpoint.

 

Matt

[zettelsm]

On 3/7/2020 at 11:43 PM, matthias said:

 

Thanks for sharing.

 

IMO, the most fair comparison between ER as FMC and OM should include:

 

1.) Using the ER as FMC only not as switch (one copper input only).

2.) Using the A-side only of ER.

3.) Using for ER and OM the same HQ PS.

4.) The downstream component must have fiber input like OR or Taiko Extreme.

 

AFAIK from his posts on WBF even @romaz has not yet done this comparison.

 

Thanks

 

Matt

 

 

 

This took longer than I thought but here are the results of some comparisons I did:

 

Several of my friends and forum members — Kennyb123, Ray-Dude, Always Learning — and I have been carrying on a back channel discussion about FMCs, SFPs, the EtherRegen (ER) from Uptone Audio and the Optical Module (OM) from Sonore/Small Green Computer. We’ve each heard some of these devices in our own systems but none of us except Kennyb123 have heard them all head to head. Through the generosity of these folks I was lent the pieces I was missing so I could do a comparison in my own system as an Extreme owner and hopefully share some insights from my perspective.

My system is listed in my current signature.

My LAN is fairly simple compared to many peoples’ setups:

 

DSL modem (WAN port) > copper jumper > Synology RT2600ac WiFi router > copper jumper > TLS OXCO switch > copper > AV system, and copper > Thecus network attached storage (NAS) device. All of these devices are in one room across the entry foyer from the living room where my stereo is located.

 

I have WiFi turned off in the modem, firewall enabled, domain name server (DNS) enabled. WiFi is turned on in the Synology RT2600ac and it is linked wirelessly with a Synology MR2200 mesh router upstairs. The MR2200 provides strong WiFi coverage upstairs and is linked via copper to an AV system in the master bedroom.

 

The DSL modem is powered from one rail of an Uptone Audio JS-2 linear power supply, a Startech FMC is powered from the other rail. The Synology RT2600ac is powered from an inexpensive variable linear power supply. The NAS uses its stock onboard SMPS. All of these power supplies are plugged into a Shunyata Research PS-8 power strip using a Shunyata Alpha Digital power cord to the wall. Additionally, a Shunyata Venom Defender is plugged into one of the PS-8 receptacles.

 

No particular vibration control is used other than original Stillpoints cones under the JS-2, Vibrapods under the cable modem and the FMC or device under test (DUT). I haven’t noted any particular improvement in sound quality with these vibration control devices, but I have them and so I use them.

 

My baseline connection from LAN to Taiko Audio Extreme server is the one recommended by Emile early on — Startech FMCs and Startech SFPs (1550nm 80km), LC LC fiber and copper jumpers. I’ve been using these even before my Extreme arrived to connect my previous Innuos Zenith server to the LAN, with the addition of another Startech FMC and jumper at the Zenith.

 

With the arrival of the Extreme, the feed from the LAN became:

 

DSL modem > copper jumper (Sablon ethernet cable) > StarTech FMC/Planet Tech SFP with -10dB attenuator > fiber > Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

   

 

My initial plan for testing involved comparing the baseline feed from LAN to Extreme to the following:

   

DSL modem > copper jumper > ER “B” side/ER “A” side/Startech SFP w/-10db attenuator > fiber > Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

DSL modem > copper jumper > ER “A” side/Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator > fiber > Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

DSL modem > copper jumper > OM/Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator > fiber > Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

Then repeat without attenuators on the SFP ports.

 

Finally, repeat again, this time substituting Planet Tech SFPs (1310nm 20km) for the Startech SFPs. Again, with and without attenuation.

   

I kept all other devices, including power supplies the same and only varied the devices used in place of the Startech FMC. Obviously, the SFPs stayed the same on each end for each trial.  

Additionally, I used a ground lead from each device to an AC earth ground; both the Startech FMC and ER have provisions for this, I backed a case screw out a little on the OM to use as its ground point. Like Rajiv in his experiments with the ER, I didn't hear any particular advantage or improvement using the ground lead with any device -- perhaps because I have also removed all SMPS' from my equipment in the computer room/office (my NAS with its internal SMPS has been off since copying all my music to the Extreme). Since the ground wire wasn't hurting anything, I left it attached for each trial.

As indicated above, in the case of the ER, I tried it as designed ("across the moat”), "B" to “A", as well as copper in/fiber out on the "A" side only.

 

I gave each device under test a minimum of 24 hours powered up with Roon Radio playing and my amplifier off before listening, with the exception of the ER tests which I performed back-to-back without additional warm up time after the first 24 hours. Any other device I thought I might want to quickly A/B against the DUT I kept warm by using an inexpensive variable linear power supply from Radio Shack.

So, that sets the stage with the test conditions and protocol. Next post — what I heard.

 

 

Because of the number of permutations involved I kept the streaming tracks used for the comparisons to a minimum to in an attempt to keep the overall project manageable and importantly, to keep my sanity. Like any audiophile, I unavoidably end up listening to sound as much as music when doing comparisons — what improved, what didn’t improve? But my tolerance for this kind of listening is pretty low and I would much rather relax and just listen to music once a certain minimum acceptable sound quality is reached. Too much concentrated A/B/C testing and I start to lose the will to go on living.

 

The three streaming selections I used are:

 

1. Brenda Fricker, Anuna, Never Give All The Heart from The Chieftains "Tears Of Stone" 16/44.1 Qobuz stream

 

2. Brian Bromberg, The Saga Of Harrison Crabfeathers, "Wood" 16/44.1 Qobuz stream

 

3. Clifford Curzon, Benjamin Britten/LSO, Mozart Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro 16/44.1 Tidal stream

 

With 2. and 3. I used two different sections in each track rather than playing the whole long track through each time. Each of these recordings have places where the digital transfer can sound anywhere from hot to irritatingly bright or hard if everything isn’t up to snuff in the digital path.

 

A word about what I listen for when doing this kind of test. I'm very sensitive to harshness, hardness and unnatural brightness. I listen for tonal balance and saturation, low-level detail, depth, width and height (particularly depth), and dynamic swing. And generally, I also try to listen for an undefined overall *enjoyability* -- would I be happy listening to my system sounding like this for hours, or would I be unsatisfied and restless?  

 

I've found that for whatever reason, a recording on the edge of being hard or harsh sounding will be tipped over that edge and become hard to listen to by less than excellent digital performance. Sibilant sounds, cymbals, and other high frequency instruments can quickly go from brilliant to bright to hot. As the top end hardens and higher frequencies become more prominent everything seems to flatten out. My test recordings tend to emphasize this in places and so represent a worst case scenario. There is still lots of music that will sound fantastic with any of these configurations though.

     

So, without further ado --

First off, my feeling is these LAN optimizations are audible and are worth pursuing, particularly since other than the power supplies and one of the devices under test (ER), they are fairly inexpensive in the audiophile scheme of things. However, I am also in general agreement with other Extreme owners that the largest benefits are gained from premium power cords, USB cables, and vibration control. Network optimization is an order of magnitude lower in effect than power, USB and vibration.

 

As a general conclusion, in all cases I preferred using the Planet Tech 1310nm 20km SFPs over the Startech 1550nm 80km SFPs. This was regardless of device (ER, FMC or OM) and regardless of attenuation used or no attenuation at all. In fact, in some circumstances the choice of SFP made a bigger delta than choice of device (ER, FMC or OM). Likewise, I found I always thought using -10dB attenuators on the receiver ports of the Startech SFPs to be a necessity, or they sounded edgy with any of the devices.

 

The most cost effective and must-do item from all my experimenting is replacing any Startech SFPs with Planet Tech SFPs. The Planet Tech SFPs made every device (OM, ER, FMC) sound better in my system. At $23.90 USD the Planet Tech SFPs are a bargain.

  

Specific device results --

Any of the combinations, even the nominally last ranked, are still much better than the 50 feet of copper ethernet I originally used between LAN and server. Also, moving my feed to the Extreme all the way upstream to an ethernet port on my DSL modem and having everything else in my LAN downstream on the other side of a WiFi router fed from the modem's WAN port, was as large a positive improvement as choice of device.

 

1. Last place, but still very honorable mention:

 

The combination of Startech FMC/Startech SFP is one I lived with even before I took delivery of the Extreme. It was a large improvement over a long run of copper ethernet from LAN to server. I did find -10dB attenuators on the receiver ports tamed some brightness which might have been caused by overdriving the SFP receivers with the powerful 1550nm lasers over a very short fiber link. 

 

The Startech FMC can sound very good, but there is better out there and it came in last of the three devices I tested. A Startech FMC with Planet Tech SFP and no attenuators sounds  better to me than the all-Startech combination of FMC and SFP.

 

However, the Startech FMC configurations sound, as someone else on one of the Internet forums observed, somewhat mechanical in nature compared to better combinations.

 

2. Good, and Better:

EtherRegen (ER) "B" to "A"/Startech SFP/-10dB attenuators, and Planet Tech SFP/no attenuation --

The ER "B" to "A" across-the-moat configuration is less mechanical or electronic sounding than the Startech FMC combos. It also nicely ameliorates any tendency of edgy digital transfers to tip over into brightness or harshness. However, with the Extreme it sounds too polite and sounds smaller and less energetic than any other combination. The Planet Tech SFP helped with the clarity but didn’t cure the small stage size and lack of dynamics.

 

3. Better, and tied for Best:

   

ER "A" to "A"/Startech SFP/-10dB attenuator, and Planet Tech SFP/no attenuation --

 

ER in the "A" to "A" configuration brought back a good part of the dynamics and life and scale of music. The Planet Tech SFP sounded a little softer than the Startech SFP, but in either case the "A" to "A" ER brought back some of the edginess too. This was slight however, and for a person who needs a switch rather than an FMC, the ER is a cost and sound-quality effective choice. And, from the preponderance of reports, if a non-Extreme owner can use it in an "A" to "B" configuration, it might be the best sounding option of all.

 

4. Best in my situation:

   

Optical Module/Startech SFP/-10dB attenuator, and OM/Planet Tech SFP/no attenuation --

 

The OM is perhaps the most transparent to, or maybe I should say the most dependent on the SFP it is paired with. With the Startech SFP even using attenuation, the OM can still be a little edgy. But it sounds big and bold and full of life, if just that little bit hard on top with less favored digital transfers. As a result, it sometimes sounds a little flat and a little forward when challenged with brighter recordings.

 

Paired with the Planet Tech SFP and without any attenuation, the OM retains all of the life and dynamics of music without any objectionable hardness on top, and with a subjective sense of more depth, dimension and space. It doesn't hide what recordings are, but it doesn't exacerbate their imperfections either. To my way of hearing, it strikes just the right balance in the context of my system and my tastes. I had one of those, “Ahhhhh, this is good!” moments when I started listening to the OM/Planet Tech SFP combination.

 

 

I wound up my tests by comparing streamed tracks to their twins residing in local on-board storage, and also tested the claim that with the Extreme and an optimized network, high-resolution (24/96, 24/192) streamed music can beat standard Redbook resolution (16/44.1) stored on-board the Extreme.

 

Listening to the same resolution streamed to compared to local playback, I thought local playback to be a bit better -- a little cleaner, a little darker and a little more depth. But it is very close and streaming certainly doesn't suffer for the comparison. I can listen to music via the Extreme and Roon Radio streaming all day long and never get tired or restless. Every so often a poorly recorded or digitally transferred track will come up, but that can happen regardless of medium. 

 

Streaming higher resolution tracks and comparing them to their standard resolution, locally stored counterparts proved a little trickier. It's difficult to determine in many cases whether the mix was also tweaked when the source recording was remastered to higher resolution; in the case of MQA high resolution, MQA processing may be affecting the recording in ways that are sometimes enhancing and sometimes detracting (in my experience). However, over a dozen or so non-MQA high resolution Qobuz selections I found that in the majority of cases I did indeed prefer the high-res streamed version over standard resolution locally stored content.

  

Once again I'll just say that all of this is very much in the context of my own system, LAN and taste in music and musical presentation. And it appears that for whatever the reason, with an Extreme in the mix some of the unique attributes of the EtherRegen don't come out in the same way they do with other servers. The EtherRegen would be my first choice if I needed a switch in the feed to my Extreme because it is still better sounding than a Startech FMC, or a TLS OXCO switch. However for my needs and for what I value in sonic presentation the Optical Module with Planet Tech SFP has just the right balance.

Hopefully this was helpful, or at least interesting and worth the time spent reading.

 

I hope everyone is well and taking care of their loved ones in this challenging time.

 

Steve Z

[zettelsm]

1 hour ago, zettelsm said:

With the arrival of the Extreme, the feed from the LAN became:

 

DSL modem > copper jumper (Sablon ethernet cable) > StarTech FMC/Planet Tech SFP with -10dB attenuator > fiber > Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

CORRECTION (since I can't edit this post now):

 

The correct feed configuration from LAN to Extreme:

 

DSL modem > copper jumper (Sablon ethernet cable) > Startech FMC/Startech SFP with -10dB attenuator > fiber > Startec SFP with -10dB attenuator/Extreme

 

Obviously, mixing a Planet Tech SFP (1310nm) on one end and a Startech SFP (1550nm) on the other end would not have worked.

 

Also, in musical test track 3. above, it is Mozart's Piano Concerto 20 and not 2.

 

Sorry for the errors.

 

Steve Z

[matthias]

4 hours ago, zettelsm said:

Once again I'll just say that all of this is very much in the context of my own system, LAN and taste in music and musical presentation. And it appears that for whatever the reason, with an Extreme in the mix some of the unique attributes of the EtherRegen don't come out in the same way they do with other servers. The EtherRegen would be my first choice if I needed a switch in the feed to my Extreme because it is still better sounding than a Startech FMC, or a TLS OXCO switch. However for my needs and for what I value in sonic presentation the Optical Module with Planet Tech SFP has just the right balance.

Hopefully this was helpful, or at least interesting and worth the time spent reading.

 

Great work Steve,

thank you:-)

 

I agree, it is certainly a big advantage to have the Extreme in a set-up for these evaluations.

 

Matt