Network Isolation

[jabbr]

Yes, compared to other audio system cables, EN cable difference is minor. Also depends a lot on how you have your network set up. If I run my music computer through my Cicso switch, then while I still hear differences between the cable types/brands, it is less than the improvement I hear with the combination of a direct connection (Mac-to-Mac) and the best EN cable.

 

The Supra Cat7+ is about the only Cat7 (individually shielded pairs) that I would be interested in trying since Supra (really Jenving Technology) is a real and sophisticated maker of wire/cables. Supra is no Belden--they don't have the long expertise and enterprise network equipment experience that Belden has, and the particular design of Belden's 10GX cable (combination of bonded-pair and Spiral-Flex for pair randomization--look it up, it is not just BS, they explain it). But if an SSTP (screened, shielded, twisted pair) is going to sound good, then the 23AWG, solid-core Supra would be it.

 

I am not sure if their U.S. importer, SJÖFN HI FI, is stocking the Supra Cat7+. I'll have to give Lars a call.

 

Thanks for calling it to our attention Brian. Let us know if you do buy or compare the Supra to the BlueJeans/Belden. As you said, they are both very reasonably priced. I happen to like Supra's USB cable VERY much. In my system it has proven better than the (admittedly small number of) much more expensive USB cables I tried.

 

Best,

 

--Alex C.

 

I'm assuming you are A/B testing 1Gbe vs 10Gbe switches?

Fiberoptic?

Are you ensuring that your wireless network uses oxygen free transmission?

[jabbr]

 

I am assuming you are being sarcastic or trying to poke fun.

But as I said, I am not using ANY switch between the two computers.

 

Sure you can use Ethernet in a point to point fashion. Ethernet switches and for that matter routers are actually quite useful ... indeed we would not be having this conversation without them.

 

If you believe that it is the Ethernet switch that is somehow affecting your soundstage -- again there are so many other factors that might have a substantially greater affect that this doesn't affect my thinking -- in all seriousness you can use a fiberoptic Ethernet connection (and switch) which will provide 100% electrical isolation between the server, switch and client computers.

 

Similarly a wireless connection provides 100% electrical isolation (even in the presence of oxygen containing fields :-))

 

On the other hand, wireless has a substantially greater network latency. Does that matter?

 

It is all about the active interfaces on the computer attached to the DAC, and minuscule noise getting in and quality of signal so that the Ethernet PHY (and its PLLs and clocks) does not have "work hard" (thereby generating more crap) to construct a signal with integrity to pass along into the PCIe controller chip.

 

Perhaps check a few of my other posts and reports.

 

With all due respect, no its not all about the active connections. Bandwidth and latency are far far more important. For audio applications latency more than bandwidth.

 

A classic computer science/engineering mistake is to spend 99% of your time optimizing only 1% of a problem.

 

Consider this: how many of you are storing your music on hard drives?

How many of you are mirroring your drives?

How are you monitoring bit rot?

[jabbr]

I, like many other here, use one form or another of a CAPS server. It's true that if someone had the smallest version it'd be too small for an additional PCIe card, but not everyone has such a small case AND the newest builds use a bigger case.

 

Duly noted though, internal space and the the shift to renderers may be a bit of why there hasn't been any talk of native PCIe fibre NICs.

 

Few people need 10gbe / SFP+ which still is an expense so the FMC is a very cost effective option for Gbe.

[jabbr]

Well it's entirely different. The USB connection to the DAC is much more touchy that Ethernet connections which generally work.

[jabbr]

I have both, and the FMC and REGEN are additive, and addictive!

 

The FMC is a terrific and very reasonable idea. I've been looking into this recently and its very interesting to see that fiberoptic transceivers consume drastically less power than Ethernet -- particularly at 10gbe and as cable length goes up. Fiberoptic transceivers are independent of cable length.

 

The 1gbe SFP transceivers are dirt cheap now on eBay (and already burned in :) ). LC-LC OM3 cables are themselves dirt cheap. I picked up a couple of SFP <-> RJ45 FMCs for $27 each.

 

I don't know if anyone has used this: Amazon.com: Diablo Cable 8 Port SFP Optical Switch with Multimode SFP: Computers & Accessories but it takes a 5V/2A supply so ideal for LPS. The packet switching noise generated by the SFP optical connections should be much less than for copper Ethernet because the transceivers are so much lower power.

 

If you are able to use Mellanox cards (not for OS X I think), then there are some terrific deals: Mellanox Connectx 2 Single Port SFP 10GbE P N Network Card MNPA19 XTR | eBay

 

I use Intel X520-DA2 cards myself (~$150 on eBay)

 

The point being that cost of entry into fiberoptic networking is much much less than it used to be and the power savings can be substantial. For a variety of reasons this means less noise.

 

Given the low cost, low power and wide availability of fiberoptic networking, there is no justification for expensive copper Ethernet cables. None.

[jabbr]

hi jabbr,

pretty good news & good links. You're right, there is something very very interesting in those FMCs.

 

A question (maybe a bit off topic) : does the use of FMC into a computer network add "time" in the data transfer ?

 

Probably not a significant amount. Fiber to fiber is fastest.

 

I mean, my PC is 15m far from my internet provider box thru optical fiber (200 Mbits/s). If I use 2 FMCs to link the internet box & the PC over the 15m, the data transfer will be faster or slower than by using an ethernet cable Cat6a ?

 

The data transfer will still be limited to 1 Gbs

My guess is :

1. ethernet cable over 15m is OK, anyway, but may lead to interferences, thus not deeply full speed

 

15m should be no problem for 1000Base-T. Power does go up as cable length increases. Maximum length is 100m

 

2. using FMCs : data transfer between FMCs is dead fast & accurate, but the FMC need "time" to convert to optical & back to RJ45. Is this extra-time will lead to a slower transfer than using a simple RJ45 cable ?

Shouldn't significantly affect transfer rate. There will be a slight latency increase but Ethernet is packet driven anyways.

 

I'm asking that because I use the Corning Optical USB cable to send the sound of my PC to a USB interface to hifi. I admit I notice a tiny delay between the sound & video, sound arrives after, very very slightly.

Video and audio are often not properly synchronized. Not an Ethernet issue.

 

Latency differences between copper Ethernet and optical are well described.

10gbethernet - Why would I choose Copper over SFP+ for 10GbE? - Server Fault

[jabbr]

I have both, and the FMC and REGEN are additive, and addictive!

 

Seriously ... this is so amazing (music) I'm converting my entire (and significant) home network to fiber ... whoaaa Ebay.... the problem is that I'm sitting and listening and using my laptop to screen share control HQplayer ... and this gives me too too much time on Ebay ... there's alot of great and inexpensive SFP optical stuff out there ... more to follow ...

[jabbr]

thinking about using optical to isolate my "music playing only" part of the network (NAS and Mac mini) from the general, non music related, part (router and other stuff only relevant to music playing to control via VNC the Mac mini)

 

power everything music related from LPSs (ethernet switch and receiving FMC included), whilst leaving everything else on stock SMPSs, would (... should?) then make perfect sense

 

 

question/advice: in this scenario, does using a gigabit FMC make sense or the 10/100 TP-Link suggested on the french thread is just fine?

(all my devices are gigabit capable. I'm concerned about the gigabit FMC being gigabit only: I have no idea if lower speeds are used as fallback should something "go wrong" or just to adapt to non gigabit devices)

 

Consider this: Amazon.com: Diablo Cable 8 Port SFP Optical Switch with One 1000M UTP Port: Electronics

 

I haven't used this particular brand, but it is inexpensive and should do the job. Mixing 10gbs with 1gbs is more complicated in fiber than copper Ethernet but optical modules have much less power requirements than copper.

 

You can mix and match SFPs between optical and copper Ethernet on the same switch if needed. The 1gbs SFP modules are dirt cheap on ebay (~$4-8) (already burned in ) or can be obtained new (~$12-60)

 

I use the FMC which accepts SFP: Amazon.com: TP-LINK MC220L Gigabit Media Converter, 1000Mbps RJ45 to 1000Mbps SFP slot supporting MiniGBIC modules, chassis mountable: Computers & Accessories

 

Using this type of switch, you can bridge to a copper Ethernet (1000base-t) switch using SFP modules which have an RJ-45 output. With this, a Cat 5/6 patch cord. The switch comes with a single copper port anyways.

 

Most SFPs are going to use LC-LC connectors and so these should also be used on the FMC and then a LC/LC duplex patch. I use OM3 rated patch cables and these are also very reasonable.

 

So anyways the above switch uses 5V/2A so no problem LPS.

 

You can install SFP PCI-e cards. I use the Intel x520-da2 which is a 10G card but accepts 1G SFP modules. These can be had on ebay for ~$150 (pre burned in) There are also 1G SFP cards. Not much savings in price but look around.

[jabbr]

scratching my head, here, whilst watching Monte Carlo GP. as soon as it ends I'll carefully study your suggestions and try to figure out what an SFP is (just to begin )

 

thank you

 

 

4 SFP modules are sitting there. They are inserted into the devices and contain the actual optic transceivers. There's another attached to the LC-LC aqua patch cable. The TP-link also has a copper Ethernet patch cable.

[jabbr]

In the same way that the Regen is a USB hub than connects two devices, the FMC is an Ethernet switch with two ports (one SFP and one RJ-45). The above referenced Diablo switch has a total of 9 ports (8 SFP and one RJ-45). If you can avoid the copper Ethernet connections it reduces noise and power.

[jabbr]

oh, ok... got it! (... almost )

 

just... looks way more than what I need

my idea was to connect Mac mini and NAS (both gigabit capable) to a gigabit switch then, from the switch, I only need one cable to the (gigabit) router. this is where I was thinking about placing optical isolation

 

Not really "way more" ... use the SFP switch as your entire gigabit switch. You can then run fiber to your mini and NAS and router with FMCs. Or run copper to other devices if you want ... or run copper between the switch and router. It is a more flexible approach.

[jabbr]

right, just... unless I'm completely lost here (Monte Cralo stil going on )... I'd need two RJ45s (Mac mini and NAS) and only one optical (to router)

 

You could also use this: http://www.amazon.com/Netgear-ProSAFE-GS110TPv2-Gigabit-GS110TP-200NAS/dp/B00LW9A328/ref=pd_sim_sbs_147_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0EPJ6Z96KKPEYSR45ETB

 

I would more strongly advise using an optical connection to your mac mini. I'd also to your router.

 

The copper Ethernet hardware does clearly generate much more noise than optical. There are a new generation of "green" Ethernet switches but most current Ethernet connections generate enough power to send the signal the full 100m even when using a 1ft patch cable. Optical transceivers don't have this problem. Noise is not only power supply generated noise, but also packet switching noise and when the packet needs to go down 100m of copper, there is more ummph used and consequently more noise. Again optics are much less prone to this issue.

[jabbr]

... ok...

 

still not getting how to bypass Mac's and Nas' ethernet ports and internal controllers

but now that Monte Carlo is over might get, not without some difficulties, a grasp on this too

 

 

thanks

 

Depends on your NAS ... mine takes PCI-e cards so adding an SFP adapter is no problem.

For the mac mini, thunderbolt <-> SFP adapters are not cost effective. Stick with the FMC (EuroDriver's solution)

[jabbr]

Hi Jabbr,

when will you implement FMCs in the main part of your home network ?

i'm thinking about doing the same thing, but I found prices of Gb FMCs were a bit high. But... yesteday I saw that TP-Link MC210CS is sold at 48eur only on amazon.fr... nice price to grab 2 of them !

 

I'm using FMCs to get to devices that can't accept a direct fiber connection. I'm using the MC220L which is $27 on amazon. This accepts a 1gbs SFP e.g. this new Cisco http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0020KPARQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 ... used SFP 1000base-sx are even cheaper.

 

The other side of the fiber connection links to an SFP switch. 1gbs SFP/fiber switches are reasonably priced at the moment ... let's say $40/port, so rather than get a bunch of extra FMC units, you can hook the other end of the fiber to the switch .e.g

 

[sFP switch] <- LC-LC duplex fiber -> [FMC1] <-RJ-45 ethernet -> [client1]

<- LC-LC duplex fiber -> [FMC2] <-RJ-45 ethernet -> [client2]

<- LC-LC duplex fiber -> [client3]

<- LC-LC duplex fiber -> [client4]

<- RJ-45 ethernet -> [client5]

<- RJ-45 ethernet -> [FMC3] <- LC-LC duplex -> [FMC4] <- RJ-45 -> [client6]

(the last case would be for a location where its not convenient to rewire fiber but the benefits of optical isolation are desired)

[jabbr]

I see here many are using multimode devices whilst on the french forum they went for single mode ones

 

question: reasons to go one way or the other?

 

thanks

 

Easiest to stick with devices that support LC-LC duplex connections and use 850nm wavelength (multimode)

 

That's why I use the TP-Link MC220L with commonly available 1000base-sx SFP module

[jabbr]

Hi,

Why did you choose to put a FMC in your network ? What does it bring to the efficiency of the network ?

Thks

 

Post #151 by EuroDriver on this thread ( http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/network-isolation-4265/index7.html#post401825 )

[jabbr]

Two come to mind:

 

1) the Diablo SFPx8 switch -- can be used w RJ-45 with 1000base-t SFP module

2) netgear gsm7328s off eBay (24 copper + 4 SFP) -- really inexpensive if you don't mind used

[jabbr]

Thx...so does this mean everything else I listed makes sense?

 

Yes, I'm a little hesitant to recommend switches that I haven't personal experience with (the diablo is tempting though). Again just be sure to use the MC220L along with an 1000base-sx SFP (for LC-LC connection).

[jabbr]

So 3 MC220L's, 4 fiber cables and 8 1000base-sx SFP's (i.e none of the switches, FMCs or PCIe cards have SFPs in them?). I will start slow with NAS and i7 using MC220L's before I move on to NAA and swap out JCAT card for fiber card, and move MC220L to NAA.

 

The MC220L works fine with the Finisar SFP's I have (which are also very reasonably priced). Depending on which card and switch you get, they may require certain brand SFPs ... not because they have to but because Brocade, Cisco etc. try to lock in their customers. There are always third party SFPs that work, but you just need to be aware of this issue. I try to get equipment that is open.

[jabbr]

Anybody located in The Netherlands experimenting with this? I have a few industrial quality allied telesys fmc's. Wondering if theyre worth the upmark in price (~5*) compared to tplink.

 

Just wait until Audioquest gets into the > $1000 SFP market We have an entirely new level of tweaking opportunities here

 

I know folk who like the price/performance of the Finisar products so I have those ... and Intel lists them as compatible with x520-da2. Finsar claims to be low power (30% less at least for some products). I've paid 5 more for these than some of the Chinese knock-offs but who knows if this makes a difference.

[jabbr]

Biought a pack of 8 Finisar SFPs on Ebay for all of $26 shipped. Thx Jabbr for the info on them.

 

Getting excited to try this fiber stuff.

 

Two more questions (worth posting here rather than a jabbr PM):

1) for those connections that require an FMC what is the conventional wisdom for length of copper ethernet from FMC to unit? For example, one of my targets is my Synology NAS, which is 30 ft from my switch to NAS (although switch can now be moved more centrally if I am less concerned about distances). Do I assume I get the NAS's FMC as close to the NAS as possible (leaving 1M or .5M or less of copper Cat6)? If the price structure of LC-LC means I need to leave 3-4M of copper (cuz the fiber price is best at 7M, for silly example) or do I buy a 25M fiber cable and roll up the rest?

 

If you look at the LC-LC patch cable pricing, it levels out so a 30m cable can be had for $30 if you look. I just look for OM3 which is overkill for 1gbs anyways.

 

 

2) since these FMCs and switchers seem to be 5A/2V is a decent linear Jameco wallwart a good choice? Or a $40 Anker 5V/2A battery, plugged in for constant charge (like I do on my SSDs)?

 

Those iFi iPower's are looking enticing ...

[jabbr]

Great info here!

 

I have a simple set up with control and audio PC's connected via 1M ethernet cable. Audio PC -> DAC via USB. No NAS, just local HDD. Wireless internet connection from Netgear C6250 to control PC.

 

Finalising my shopping list.

 

2 x MC220L.

 

2 x OM3 50/125 LC to LC DLX 2.8mm

 

Just get 1 x duplex LC-LC

 

2 X SFP 1000 GLC-SX-MM-C

 

 

Would that be correct and anything else needed? Thanks!

You need a couple of short Ethernet patch cables (I use 1 foot).

 

When you are ready for a NAS, you can get an SFP (optical) switch, one more MC220L, two more cables and 4 more SFP modules.

 

Lots of parts to assemble, but really cheap.

[jabbr]

:

The final cost remains quite OK if you take in account that : 1. fibers are cheap & 2. TPLinks you'll put on the other side of the SG5412F are not so expensive. Just add a power bank to the FMCs related to audio. And that's it.

 

Then, for audio purposes FMCs bring a lot. That's clear.

Does a fully optical network within an house is more efficient/stable/fast than a common RJ45 Gb switch ? That's my question...

(sorry for this post slightly off "pure audio")

Rgds

 

The TP-link switch looks really good. The Diablo cable switch (8 port) takes external DC power in case anyone wants to LPS

 

This all is for people who are avoiding using a copper Ethernet switch with their audio systems because of SQ concerns -- likewise people who are tempted to get so-called audiophile Ethernet cables.

 

From a data POV 1gbs is 1gbs. From an energy POV optical is clearly better particularly at 10gbs.

 

Remember with sfp you can mix and match fiber & copper with RJ-45 SFP modules (called 1000base-T)

 

There's a lot of tweaking that can be done, looking at streaming video etc.

[jabbr]

The only issue to consider with the TP Link, one of our network guys tells me, is that it is not the quietest switch (got those little fans). The Diablo switch is likely quieter (and accepts a 5V/2A power supply - iPower hint hint).

 

In my own setup, I run all the cables to our basement from everywhere in the house. I cut outlets in the walls near the AC outlets and then run a plastic pole up to the attic and use a cable puller. The cables go down an old laundry chute in to the basement and then over to the network rack. Point is that noisy equipment is isolated. If your switch is in your audio room, I'd get a fanless one. Does anyone know if the Diablo switch has a fan?

[jabbr]

Are you saying that with a GB switch (like the TP-Link SG5412F) and a TP-Link MC220L (the FMC we have been talking about) that because both are 1GB the ONLY speed they send is 1GB; meaning if a renderer like Sonore Rendu or a NAS like Synology needs less it won't work? Audio is nowhere near 1GB; these are clearly overkill but this has been mentioned. Why would folks like Eurodriver and jabbr recommend these setups if overkill means incompatible?

 

The answer is more complicated than it might be, partially because there are so so many products and while they are intended to interoperate, they may not always. Like everything. Generally when we say 1Gbe (gigabit ethernet), we are refering to 1000base-T (gigabit ethernet over twisted pair using RJ-45 connector).

 

A requirement of 1000base-T is autonegotiation with 10base-T and 100base-T devices. Optical gigabit ethernet (1000base-SX) does not have this requirement, but specific switches and SFP modules may implement e.g. 10G/1G SFP+ or 1000/100 base-SX.

 

So.... bottom line is that I would assume that any sensible NAS would do 1Gbe (1000base-T). I looked up the Sonore Rendu and it mentions Ethernet without a specific speed, so in this day and age, I'd assume that it does 1000base-T but you know the saying about "assume making an ass of u and me". In that spirit, I will start a new thread "Optical Network Configurations" where people can post "known good" combinations of ethernet devices, switches, SFP modules so that we can all see what other people have been found to work.