The true experimental tweak thread

[desbiss]

I posted this on another thread, but it may be more suited here...

 

I am interested in hearing others' thoughts regarding what sort of a SQ improvement I could expect with the AQVOX AQ-SWITCH-8 in my system... I have already taken some steps to improve my current switch, and have been impressed with the results thus far. I'm trying to legitimize the added cost for the AQ-SWITCH-8...

 

CURRENT SCENARIO: I presently have a Netgear GS108 switch with an iFi iPower PS replacing the factory wallwart... I am also already using high quality ethernet cables on the switch (Nordost for Audio purposes, and Audioquest for non-audio items). As well, I have the LAN IN on port 1, and main audio OUT to my Aurender on port 8...

 

I've read through everything I could find on the forum about the AQVOX switch, and the comments are compelling. I'm curious if anyone has transitioned from a setup like what I already have, as noted above, to the AQ-SWITCH-8... and the gains to be had. I primarily listen to Tidal, and am excited to have read many comments indicating it bears a significant improvement.

 

Thanks in advance!

[desbiss]

3 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

Actually, the Aqvox switch-8 is perticularly great with Tidal. I actually consider it as one of my best audio related purchases. I listen 100% to Tidal and would never trade the Aqvox for another switch. Maybe just upgrade it to the SE version. I have'nt tried your specific Netgear switch in my setup nor the iFi iPower, but a bunch of others Netgear and TP-Link switches. Aqvox beats them all with Tidal. According to others the Aqvox switch do not improve local content as much. It is definately worth to try a better LPS or battery supply for the Aqvox switch. Despite what Aqvox say. If you use a SMPS you should consider DC- output grounding and ground the GND screw as well.

 

 

 

 

That’s very promising to hear! Thank you Cornan for the feedback, especially since the large majority of my listening is also via Tidal...

 

Can I ask, were the Netgear / TP-Link switches you experimented with ones that were bone stock, or were they optimized with better power supplies / Ethernet cables?

 

I have experimented with the iPower and better cables, and saw improvement... so I retained them permanently. What I am trying to discern is if the AQ-SWITCH-8 would yield even better results than my current scenario, and if it’s worth the cost potentially(?)...

 

My system is quite resolving and I am not too much of a tinkerer, so the decision criteria for me would be it bettering my current combination of Netgear, Nordost cables, and the iPower.

 

Much appreciated!

[desbiss]

16 hours ago, tapatrick said:

Like @Cornan I highly recommend the Aqvox switch. It has transformed Tidal streaming and this now betters my local files which I don’t listen to much any more (and I have an Antipodes DXe )

i imagine the newer Aqvox switch model must be better too but I can’t justify the price. 

Their supplied psu is good but I power it with an Linear psu and the switch is a major addition to my system. 

Thanks for your comments tapatrick! That's promising feedback, especially with my being mostly a Tidal listener. 

 

The SE model switch is a bit too much $$ for me to justify, so the AQ-SWITCH-8 is my focus. I'm just trying to get a sense for whether / not the cost is worthwhile, and that the gains will be there vs my current scenario with the Netgear GS108 with the iFi iPower and Nordost Ethernet cables (which would remain in the mix)...

 

I'm also glad to hear the AQVOX switch plays nice with Antipodes gear... I currently am using an Aurender X100s server, but have the Antipodes Core on my radar.

[desbiss]

55 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

You´re welcome desbiss!

 

I used battery supplies on all of my previous 5v network switches and used the same type on Aqvox switch-8. I did try the original Aqvox SMPS without DC- output grounding, but found battery supplies much better. Now I actually use Gophert csp-3205II floating SMPS into a floating IT which I found better than the battery supply. I am quite sure a good LPS will improve it as well.

 

I am not sure if iFi iPower will better Aqvox own SMPS or not since I have never tried it myself. However, since you have it will be quite easy to try it out together with DC- output grounding with the Aqvox and see how it turns out.

 

If your system is very resolving and you are listening to a lot of Tidal it is IMHO equally important to upgrade the power supply for the router as well. A LPS is a good start.

 

 

Thank you for your reply Cornan! Very much appreciated.

 

I'm glad to hear that, (with your prior switches), you'd experimented with factors separate to the switch itself. That gives me more confidence in there being a worthwhile difference with the AQ-SWITCH-8. Helps to legitimize the cost.

 

I've looked a bit more into the DC-ouput grounding option, but am not entirely clear... Is this simply a matter of grounding the switch's case directly to the grounding post of my AC receptacle / receptacle box (which are grounded to my home wiring)...?

 

Thanks as well for the suggestion regarding a better router power supply. I already am using an iPower on it, and certainly did notice benefit. Though I expect a proper LPS would yield further benefit, I am satisfied with what the iPower brought to the equation. They work very well for the cost. My needs were a bit dictated by budget, but also some space limitations...

[desbiss]

11 minutes ago, Al Jones said:

I just hooked up  an Aqvox SE switch for burn-in. I will give it a few days, before I start comparing it to the standard version.

Will be interested in your observations! I'm leaning toward the AQ-SWITCH-8, but also eying up the SE model... Not sure I can legitimize the additional cost though.

 

Are there any apparent differences from the get-go? Do they use the same PS as the AQ-SWITCH-8?

[desbiss]

On 2017-11-20 at 10:37 AM, Monge said:

You migth have a look here regarding Grounding

In any case I Think your IPower will benefit Grounding the negative DC output

The AQVOX Switch need 5V/DC

Regards Monge

Thanks for sharing the link Monge. I'll have a read through it. Much appreciated!

[desbiss]

On 2017-11-20 at 11:09 AM, Cornan said:

 

Your welcome desbiss! ?

 

There is quite a lot of things that could potensially increase SQ for a router as well IME. A new router and optimized settings ofcourse, but also AC mains DC Blocker, F-plug DC Blocker (if your router have satellite input) alt ethernet isolator (if router  have ethernet input), AC mains voltage regulator, isolation transformer with floating secondary etc. I personally also isolate the router and Aqvox switch with a wireless adapter (wired to the Aqvox switch and Aries Mini). I use the TP-Link RE450 with good results, but I'll guess the RE650 is even better.

 

With a switch it is also important to use one only for audio. That one should have input ethernet cable to port 1 and output ethernet cable to the last port. Grounding the GND screw is very important as well as DC- output grounding as @Monge posted you a link to! ?

Thanks again for the tips Cornan. Very helpful. Sounds like I've got some experimenting to do...  

 

As for audio-only use of the switch... My switch presently has 2 ethernet ports in use for non-audio purposes. I can definitely disconnect one of them, which currently attaches my wifi router to the switch. The router can then be connected directly to my ISP modem, and will use a 2nd separate IP address. (I'm not sure if there's any benefit to be had with the 2nd IP address from an audio perspective, but I presume having the wifi off the switch would be a good thing.)

 

After that, I'd only have one "non-audio" device connected to the switch. This being a TV that is not powered on during 2 channel listening. (The lights on the port that the TV is connected to do not light up at all when the TV is turned off, so there doesn't appear to be any 'live' connection at those times.) That said, the TV is used for Netflix streaming and I've noticed Video / Audio benefit from being connected to the switch. (The TV is integrated into my 2 channel gear.)

 

I presume getting my wifi off the switch would provide the most benefit from an audio-only isolation perspective... and hopefully the TV remaining would not be detrimental, given that it does not appear to be connected when not in use.

[desbiss]

7 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

You're welcome desbiss! ?

 

What you can start with is to try to DC- output ground (JSGT) to the PSU for the switch and then connect the different devices to different magnetic boxes of the switch. How do you understand which port to connect? If you have a 8 port switch each magnetic box is in pairs. You can clearly see this on switches since there are a bit more space between the RJ45 sections. So if you have three devices and 4 Ethernet cables connected to the switch use it like this:

Port 1= input from router

port 8= output to audio device

Port 3 or 4= first non audio device

Port 5 or 6= second non audio device

 

In theory this should sound a lot better! ?

 

 

 

 

Thanks! I just got off the phone with my internet service provider and have the wiring re-configured, all with the same IP address (ignore prior comment about a 2nd one being in the mix, the first person I spoke with was incorrect).

 

I now have 2 ethernet cables connected directly to my ISP modem. One to the Wifi router, the other to my Netgear switch (thus removing the WiFi router from the switch ). Wiring on the switch is now as follows...

 

Port 1 = input from ISP modem

Port 8 = output to streaming audio device (Aurender)

Port 4 = 'non audio' device (TV)

All other ports = no devices connected

 

I'll have to do some listening to see if I can notice any differences.

 

Another consideration is whether there is any port priority on my ISP modem (similar to the switch scenario)... I may have to call them back and ask. I'm not sure if that would matter from an audio perspective? Interested in any thoughts you may have.

 

Again, much appreciated!

[desbiss]

24 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

Looks good! Try port 6 as well as port 4. You never know which one that is most isolated.

 

 

If your switch supports QoS it will surely affect SQ as well. For the TP-Link/Aqvox the first and the last ports have the highest priority. 

Thanks! I contacted my ISP to see if the cable modem has any port prioritization. They were unable to confirm. So with that, I've connected the Netgear switch ethernet cable to one of the end ports on the ISP modem (they're not labelled, but there are 4 in total). The wifi ethernet cable is connected to one of the middle ports on the ISP modem. If QoS is supported by the ISP modem, the switch should have priority... provided that the end ports are given priority.

 

I'll also give port 6 on the switch a try, (over 4). Good suggestion.

 

Next step - deciding if I want to spring for the AQ-SWITCH-8!

[desbiss]

On 2017-11-23 at 9:05 AM, Monge said:

Is it a modem/router all in one?

I have a Netgear CG3000EU modem/router and I use port 1 to Switch and port 4 to my AV. This combination sound Best to me.

Netgear.CG3000:

https://www.insidegadgets.com/2016/07/16/inside-the-netgear-wireless-cable-voice-gateway-cg3000-1staus/

This modem/router is very good IMO. I don’t know why, but it sound very natural.

Also I use Axing DC-blocker pre CG3000 and a Supra ground seperator at the wall splitter/outlet as recommended by @Cornan

Regards Monge

Hi Monge - I’m using a Hitron CGNM-2250, supplied by my internet provider. This is a combination unit but I disabled the Wifi as I prefer the newer Apple Airport Express.

 

I’ve never really had much consideration for the modems I use, and go with whatever is provided. This model certainly performs well.