Sonore opticalRendu

[incus]

Just to check back in - the Optical Rendu powered by a SOtM sPS-500 is sounding very very good indeed. It's the only power supply I could get to work on my desk - the LPS 1.2 I have talked about already. The Vinnie Rossi is far too noisy as a unit to have sitting there so close to me. And I was told not to try the TLS LPS on 9V. So there you have it...

 

The oRendu has officially knocked the sMS-200 Ultra SE out of my headphone playback chain for good. I know many with laugh/object/get their knickers in a twist when I say this - but it sounds best with two SOtM switches before it - the first one takes the Ethernet signal (via SOtM cables) from the modem and the server, then connects optically to the second SOtM switch which connects optically (obviously) to the oRendu. So triple reclocking and double optical isolation!  The oRendu plays into my mScaler/Hugo TT2 combo. Best my headphones have sounded since I started this hobby so many years ago... There is obviously more going on than just optical isolation helping with leakage. Those clocks and new parts are something else . Fantastic frequency balance along with seductive transients, gorgeous trailing edges, incredible air and ease around the notes, rock-solid timing, and a full-bodied, organic tone. I feel I am much more a part of the musical event - witnessing as it starts and unfolds in a much more direct way. It's uncanny at times, in fact, how inside the music I feel now. Everything has slowed down so the notes are observable, tangible, hovering in 3d space, whatever you want to call it. I am very grateful to be able to have such a tactile experience, to participate in the music in this way, almost giddy in fact... I've spent a long time "searching for the sound" and this is one of those products that brings me palpably closer. Great job, Sonore!

[incus]

2 minutes ago, MagnusH said:

but any problems on a ground-plane will certainly not pass a fiber.

You know this, how?

[vortecjr]

3 hours ago, lumos said:

Dear John,

 

I am in awe of your patience. I used to believe that everything in the digital domain was the same until I saw that data in an oscilloscope and realised that, in fact, nothing in the digital domain is really digital at all. States do not change instantly from a 0 to a 1, there is a leading edge slope and a trailing edge slope. You now have the problem of deciding at what voltage will you say the state has actually changed. Is everything in the chain doing it the same, or even consistently. As Rob Watts at Chord demonstrates, the human brain is incredibly sensitive to timing errors and its impact on the sense of realism. 

 

But none of this really matters. I don't really have a good sense of hearing and I always go to the bother of double blind testing new equipment. I start off being cynical and sometimes I am proved wrong (my microrendus were better than my Sonicorbiters and my Ultrarendus are better than my microrendus. The Uptone Audio power supplies made a positive impact. When the DAC test revealed that I had preferred the Chord Mojo to my Naim DAC in nine out of 10 tracks I sold my Naim DAC. I have never been able to discern a difference with interconnects, power cables, speaker cables. 

 

So for me John has earned some trust in an industry where very few do. This is not homeopathy, here John explains a real mechanism of action and the price of the equipment feels very much like cost plus as opposed to the usual "how much can we charge whilst keeping a straight face" strategy. 

 

The only data point the matters is do we like what it sounds like. If I love the sound then nothing really matters. And the optical rendu plus module will not even buy you a power lead with a wooden ring on it.

It's posts like this that make what we do all worth the effort. 

[vortecjr]

5 hours ago, bobflood said:

And, the pertinent question is:

 

Does any of this actually matter in the final output of the DAC?

 

I look forward to John completing his test gear to actually measure and see.

John's testing / measurements aside the goal is simply to move past the old normal and give people a chance to decide form themselves now if it matters. The Rendu product line is diverse and we have something for everyone, even skeptics, to enjoy:)   

[vortecjr]

28 minutes ago, incus said:

Just to check back in - the Optical Rendu powered by a SOtM sPS-500 is sounding very very good indeed. It's the only power supply I could get to work on my desk - the LPS 1.2 I have talked about already. The Vinnie Rossi is far too noisy as a unit to have sitting there so close to me. And I was told not to try the TLS LPS on 9V. So there you have it...

 

The oRendu has officially knocked the sMS-200 Ultra SE out of my headphone playback chain for good. I know many with laugh/object/get their knickers in a twist when I say this - but it sounds best with two SOtM switches before it - the first one takes the Ethernet signal (via SOtM cables) from the modem and the server, then connects optically to the second SOtM switch which connects optically (obviously) to the oRendu. So triple reclocking and double optical isolation!  The oRendu plays into my mScaler/Hugo TT2 combo. Best my headphones have sounded since I started this hobby so many years ago... There is obviously more going on than just optical isolation helping with leakage. Those clocks and new parts are something else . Fantastic frequency balance along with seductive transients, gorgeous trailing edges, incredible air and ease around the notes, rock-solid timing, and a full-bodied, organic tone. I feel I am much more a part of the musical event - witnessing as it starts and unfolds in a much more direct way. It's uncanny at times, in fact, how inside the music I feel now. Everything has slowed down so the notes are observable, tangible, hovering in 3d space, whatever you want to call it. I am very grateful to be able to have such a tactile experience, to participate in the music in this way, almost giddy in fact... I've spent a long time "searching for the sound" and this is one of those products that brings me palpably closer. Great job, Sonore!

Definitely, the quote of the day. Enjoy! 

[cat6man]

2 hours ago, incus said:

 

 

The oRendu has officially knocked the sMS-200 Ultra SE out of my headphone playback chain for good. I know many with laugh/object/get their knickers in a twist when I say this - but it sounds best with two SOtM switches before it - the first one takes the Ethernet signal (via SOtM cables) from the modem and the server, then connects optically to the second SOtM switch which connects optically (obviously) to the oRendu. So triple reclocking and double optical isolation!  The oRendu plays into my mScaler/Hugo TT2 combo. Best my headphones have sounded since I started this hobby so many years ago... There is obviously more going on than just optical isolation helping with leakage. Those clocks and new parts are something else . Fantastic frequency balance along with seductive transients, gorgeous trailing edges, incredible air and ease around the notes, rock-solid timing, and a full-bodied, organic tone. I feel I am much more a part of the musical event - witnessing as it starts and unfolds in a much more direct way. It's uncanny at times, in fact, how inside the music I feel now. Everything has slowed down so the notes are observable, tangible, hovering in 3d space, whatever you want to call it. I am very grateful to be able to have such a tactile experience, to participate in the music in this way, almost giddy in fact... I've spent a long time "searching for the sound" and this is one of those products that brings me palpably closer. Great job, Sonore!

 

great report..........thank you.

this is more evidence that, in a very hi-rez system, the upstream jitter/reclocking can matter (YMMV).

in my case, i've enough suggestive info to go ahead an order an optical module to place by my network router and reclcok before the long feed to opticalRendu..

 

by the way, the comment that 'everything has slowed down' is my key indicator for great sound.  when that happens, i hear magic.

NOTE:  i once attained a level where i had that experience but stupidly changed a few things in my system that "should not" have made a difference (usb cables, psu, etc) and lost the magic..............lesson==>don't screw around after you achieve magic unless you are very careful to keep track of what you change so that you can get back to where you were

[barrows]

15 minutes ago, cat6man said:

by the way, the comment that 'everything has slowed down' is my key indicator for great sound.  when that happens, i hear magic.

Yes!  I believe this happens because the brain relaxes when playback is "right"; that is, the brain does not have to do so much processing to sort out the music, hence the perception that things are "slowed".

[juliush]

I'm afraid there are some serious misconceptions here regarding the networking protocols and their relation to the transport of digitized audio information. Regarding all these reasoning about the "clock phase noise" and reducing its effect by the subsequent "reclockings", the fact is that during the networking transportation the digitized audio information is sliced into smaller pieces, heavily encoded into standard packages with robust error-correction and sent package-by-package via the network asynchronously in most of the cases not even in a linear way from time perspective.

Meaning that there is no clock phase information submitted from audio perspective, only information.

Please note that I'm talking about the audio point of view only, of course the clocking mechanism for the package transmission could include reclocking events at such interfaces as optical-electrical conversion but again those have nothing to do with the enclosed audio information.

On the receiver side the information re-instated from the transported data again in non-linear way and the fully reconstructed and verified data is submitted to the digital-to-analog conversion by a completely new timing which is not re-clocked in any means from the former stages, but a completely new one.

[Summit]

On 6/5/2019 at 2:07 AM, JohnSwenson said:

The understanding of "isolation" in digital audio has been my passion for at least 10 years. There is a LOT of misunderstanding on the subject floating around in audio circles.  Here is a quick summary of my current understanding and how the current products fit in with this.

 

There seems to be TWO independent mechanisms involved: leakage current and clock phase noise. Various amounts of these two exist in any system. Different "isolation" technologies out there address one or the other, but very rarely both at the same time.  Some technologies that attenuate one actually increase the other. Thus the massively confusing information out there.

 

Leakage current is a property of power supplies. It is the leakage of AC mains frequency (50/60 Hz) into the DC output. It is usually common mode (ie exists on BOTH the + and - wires at the same time, this makes it a bit difficult to see. There seems to be two different types, one that comes from linear supplies and is fairly easy to block, and an additional type that comes from SMPS and is MUCH harder to block. An SMPS contains BOTH types. They are BOTH line frequency.

 

Unfortunately in our modern times where essentially all computer equipment is powered by SMPS we have to deal with this situation of both leakage types coming down cables from our computer equipment. There are many devices on the market (I have designed some of them) for both USB and Ethernet, most can deal with the type from linear supplies but only a few can deal with the type from SMPS.

 

Optical connections (when the power supplies are completely isolated from each other) CAN completely block all forms of leakage, it is extremely effective. Optical takes care of leakage, but does not deal with the second mechanism.

 

Clock phase noise

 

Phase noise is a frequency measurement of "jitter", yes that term that is so completely mis-understood in audio circles that I'm not going to use it. Phase noise is a way to look at the frequency spectrum of jitter, the reason to use it is that there seems to be fairly decent correlation to sound quality. Note this has nothing to do with "pico seconds" or "femto seconds". Forget those terms, they do not directly have meaning in audio, what matters is the phase noise. Ynfortunately phase noise is shown on a graph, not a single number, so it is much harder to directly compare units. This subject is HUGE and I'm not going to go into any more detail here.

 

Different oscillators (the infamous "clocks" that get talked about) can have radically different phase noise. The level of phase noise that is very good for digital audio is very difficult to achieve and costs money. The corollary is that the cheap clocks used in most computer equipment (including network equipment) produce phase noise that is very bad for digital audio.

 

The important thing to understand is that ALL digital signals carry the "fingerprint" of the clock used to produce them. When a signal coming from a box with cheap clocks comes into a box (via Ethernet or USB etc) with a much better clock, the higher level of phase noise carried on the data signal can contaminate the phase noise of the "good" clock in the second box. Exactly how this happens is complicated, I've written about this in detail if you want to look it up and see what is going on.

 

The contamination is not complete, every time the signal gets "reclocked" by a much better clock the resulting signal carries an attenuated version of the first clock layered on top of the fingerprint of the second clock. The word "reclocked" just means the signal is regenerated by a circuit fed a different clock. It may be a better or a worse clock, reclocking doesn't always make things better!

 

As an example if you start with an Ethernet signal coming out of a cheap switch, the clock fingerprint is going to be pretty bad. If this goes into a circuit with a VERY good clock, the signal coming out contains a reduced fingerprint from the first clock layered on top of the good clock. If you feed THIS signal into another circuit with a very good clock, the fingerprint from the original clock gets reduced even further. But if you feed this signal into a box with a bad clock, you are back to a signal with a bad fingerprint.

 

The summary is that stringing together devices with GOOD clocking can dramatically attenuate the results of an upstream bad clock.

 

The latest devices form Sonore take on BOTH of these mechanisms that effect sound: optical for blocking leakage and multiple reclocking with very good clocks. The optical part should be obvious. A side benefit of the optical circuit is that is completely regenerates the signal with a VERY low phase noise clock, this is a one step reclocking. It attenuates effects from upstream circuits but does not completely get rid of them. This is where the opticalModule comes into play, if you put an opticalModule in the path to the opticalRendu you are adding another reclocking with VERY good clocking. The result is a very large attenuation of upstream effects. It's not completely zero, but it is close.

 

The fact that the opticalRendu is a one stage reclocking (which leaves some effects from upstage circuits) is why changing switches etc can still make a difference. Adding an OpticalModule between the switch and opticalRendu reduces that down to vanishingly small differences.

 

So an optical module by itself adds both leakage elimination and significant clock effects attenuation. TWO optical modules in series give you the two level reclocking .

 

An opticalRendu still has some significant advantages over say an ultraRendu fed by a single opticalModule, the circuitry inside the opticalRendu has been improved significantly over the ultraRendu. (it uses new parts that did not exist when the ultraRendu was designed). In addition the opticalRendu has the reclocking taking place a couple millimeters away from the processor which cuts out the effects of a couple connectors, transformers and cable. The result is the opticalRendu has some significant advantages.

 

An opticalModule feeding an ultraRendu does significantly improve it, but not as much as an opticalRendu. So you can start with an opticalModule, then when you can afford it add an opticalRendu, also fed by the opticalModule and get a BIG improvement.

 

I hope this gives a little clarity to the situation.

 

John S.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes indeed and the reps from Sonore have very firmly denied and even ridicule that the clocks and PSU upstream of the renderer make ANY SQ difference, until now with their optical gear.

 

[firedog]

2 hours ago, Summit said:

Yes indeed and the reps from Sonore have very firmly denied and even ridicule that the clocks and PSU upstream of the renderer make ANY SQ difference, until now with their optical gear.

Don't think so. Can you find such quotes?

[jabbr]

18 hours ago, barrows said:

Some have suggested that Internet based playback sounds worse than the same locally stored files (hard to be sure the file is the same though, unless a checksum is run...).  Would it be an appropriate conclusion to say that if your statement above is true and correct, then music streamed from the internet is hopelessly compromised?  Also it appears there might also be implications for any music music sharing over a Network, including as is done regularly in music production, if that clock phase noise is somehow accumulating, along with the data...

 

Careful. The internet backbone itself consists of multiple hops of typically very high quality clocks. The clock requirements of 10GbE are vastly higher than 1GbE (which is one reason I use 10G switches) and the clock requirements of 100G are astonishing — to the point where people say that the phase margin error limit fir 100G is zero! (Look it up, it’s really impressive technology). 

 

So I’d say that a reclocking stage or two would scrub the upend digital signal. Assuming a functioning/compliant chain — a single 100G stage will scrub any upstream 1G signal to the point where it is unmeasurable by current equipment. 

 

If someone can measure a clock signature through a two stage eg ooticslModule/opticalRendu ... alternatively through a good professional grade 10G switch, then let’s see it. 

 

This is type of digital noise just doesn’t accumulate.

[vortecjr]

4 hours ago, Summit said:

 

Yes indeed and the reps from Sonore have very firmly denied and even ridicule that the clocks and PSU upstream of the renderer make ANY SQ difference, until now with their optical gear.

 

Yes and no. What John wrote about is something he has been researching for some time and we have been talking to him about just as long. While there are some white papers discussing the phenomena what remains is for John to complete his measurements for his own edification. John wants to understand this phenomena more than anyone. Understand that John is designing products for us and Alex and these things take time. He also may not want to disclose everything yet.

This phase noise is not something blaring obvious or easy to measure at the output of the DAC. In fact, I can't see it with my analyzer and it's very sensitive. As such, I have advised many to concern themselves with things that we can measure as having a significant impact on sound such as the use of a good power supply.

What I ridicule in the silly thread is trying to overly convince people that these approaches are massive improvements and needed for good sound. A microRendu produces incredible sound quality because its an incredible great design. What I ridicule is modding off the shelf gear with power supplies and expensive clocks they were never meant to take advantage of. The Rendu line and Module line are ground up designs.  What I ridicule is taking all the modded gear and interconnecting it with a bunch of wires that just pick up noise, defeat isolation, and defeat the very thing you are trying to achieve. None of this is needed with our gear because they all have clean power and low noise oscillators. What I ridicule is connection noisy gear to quiet gear and claiming massive improvements when clearly all you are doing is making things worse. Connect a computer via optical and you have infinite isolation. What I ridicule is a manufacturer coming into our forum and telling people they need two of their $1000 switches in series to get good sound. Sorry but this seems like a money grab to me. I can go on and on because there is plenty to ridicule. What should be obvious is the we are trying to lead by example. 

[jabbr]

59 minutes ago, jabbr said:

and the clock requirements of 100G are astonishing

 

Let me correct that: it’s the system end to end jitter requirement, not simply the clock. Cross talk is probably more important than the oscillator. Hitting the multilevel eye pattern is very very difficult. 

 

Let me also try to explain another way: these numbers are purely examples and @vortecjr can publish real ones if desired.

 

Suppose the opticalModule as a single stage cuts down incoming phase nose by -90dBc/Hz and suppose the incoming signal has a noise level of -60dBc/Hz ... he he so the “signature” of the incoming signal passes through at ? -150 but buried in the baseline phase noise. So does it really get through?

[vortecjr]

The master plan is to publish ‘Memoirs and Measurements’ when I retire:)

[Summit]

2 hours ago, vortecjr said:

Yes and no. What John wrote about is something he has been researching for some time and we have been talking to him about just as long. While there are some white papers discussing the phenomena what remains is for John to complete his measurements for his own edification. John wants to understand this phenomena more than anyone. Understand that John is designing products for us and Alex and these things take time. He also may not want to disclose everything yet.

This phase noise is not something blaring obvious or easy to measure at the output of the DAC. In fact, I can't see it with my analyzer and it's very sensitive. As such, I have advised many to concern themselves with things that we can measure as having a significant impact on sound such as the use of a good power supply.

What I ridicule in the silly thread is trying to overly convince people that these approaches are massive improvements and needed for good sound. A microRendu produces incredible sound quality because its an incredible great design. What I ridicule is modding off the shelf gear with power supplies and expensive clocks they were never meant to take advantage of. The Rendu line and Module line are ground up designs.  What I ridicule is taking all the modded gear and interconnecting it with a bunch of wires that just pick up noise, defeat isolation, and defeat the very thing you are trying to achieve. None of this is needed with our gear because they all have clean power and low noise oscillators. What I ridicule is connection noisy gear to quiet gear and claiming massive improvements when clearly all you are doing is making things worse. Connect a computer via optical and you have infinite isolation. What I ridicule is a manufacturer coming into our forum and telling people they need two of their $1000 switches in series to get good sound. Sorry but this seems like a money grab to me. I can go on and on because there is plenty to ridicule. What should be obvious is the we are trying to lead by example. 

 

Am not sure you understand me correctly. I agree with John that there is a lot of misunderstanding regarding isolation floating around in audio circles. I and many others have heard the effect of using better digital components upstream of the renderer. That includes clocks. LAN cards and PSU on server and switch etc.

 

It is of course good if we would know the mechanism and exact reason to why clocks, PSU and other things have an impact on sound on upstream gear, but even without the technical explanation, if I can hear the effect clearly it what’s really matter.    

[Summit]

4 hours ago, firedog said:

Don't think so. Can you find such quotes?

 

I guess you must have missed the now deleted thread: ”A novel way to massively improve the SQ of the microRendu / ultraRendu” there they made fun of people that are using better clocks and PSU on different digital gear.

 

A couple of examples can be found in this tread.

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/55716-innuos-zenith-mk3-or-opticalrendu-separate-server/page/7/

[firedog]

13 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

I guess you must have missed the now deleted thread: ”A novel way to massively improve the SQ of the microRendu / ultraRendu” there they made fun of people that are using better clocks and PSU on different digital gear.

 

A couple of examples can be found in this tread.

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/55716-innuos-zenith-mk3-or-opticalrendu-separate-server/page/7/

The only problem with your posts is that your understanding/description of what Jesus said is mistaken. He didn't claim what you claim he claimed. He was referring to other, specific claims made and did measurements that showed certain tweaks made no difference. Not the same as your  exaggerated description of his statements. 

[Summit]

16 minutes ago, firedog said:

The only problem with your posts is that your understanding/description of what Jesus said is mistaken. He didn't claim what you claim he claimed. He was referring to other, specific claims made and did measurements that showed certain tweaks made no difference. Not the same as your  exaggerated description of his statements. 

 

I’m not mistaken and did not exaggerate. He thinks that if he didn’t measure any difference on the analogue output of his DAC it somehow makes it a FACT for that the PSU on the switch doesn’t matter. The same with everything else that they said about clocks upstream doesn’t matter. I disagree.  

[barrows]

6 hours ago, Summit said:

Yes indeed and the reps from Sonore have very firmly denied and even ridicule that the clocks and PSU upstream of the renderer make ANY SQ difference, until now with their optical gear.

This is a Sonore sponsored forum.  I suggest that you be very careful here with your insinuations.  Certainly, I have questioned whether upstream (of an optical interface clocks matter), but at the same time I have mentioned that the jury is out on finding actual truth (verification) of such, and that is still the case.  There is plenty of anecdotal evidence of such, but the evidence is only anecdotal.  Until there is confirmation by measurement, that is all we have.

Here at Sonore, we prefer a sober approach-advising potential customers on what we know matters-at the same time we are involved in ongoing research doing everything we can to improve playback performance, which includes addressing upstream, clocking in a reasonable and cost effective way.  

[barrows]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

So does it really get through?

That is the $100,000 question!  What John Swenson appears to be suggesting is that the incoming phase noise signature gets attenuated by the the re-clocking, but not entirely eliminated.  It is very interesting at this point, and the anecdotal reports of significant improvements with the opticalModule (while using an opticalRendu or Signature Rendu SEoptical).  Note when I say "significant" improvement, I mean in audiophile terms-could be just a slight bit more ambience retrieval (as an example) which might not even be noticed by a non-audiophile type listener, but might be very meaningful to an audiophile with a well sorted high end system.  I think it is important to try and clarify the type of difference possible from these system refinements, given the "massive" improvements touted by some.

 

Plus, hey this is the opticalRendu thread-now the oR does make a much larger improvement to my ears-any more sonic obersavations from folks upgrading to the opticalRendu? 

[Michaelb4]

System:

Roon over Wifi-EERO mesh. 

Some kind of Switch? Cheap power supply

Fiber into OpticalRendu

USB into Mytek Brooklyn Dac+, both Dac and Optical rendu run off the same Uptone

JS 2 power supply

Bel Canto Ref 600 Amp

B&W 802

Really enjoy system and noticed an audible improvement when OpticalRendu installed. No way for me to know if it was isolation from fiber or just that the OpticalRendu is a better unit made with better parts. I purchased the Optical Module hoping better parts and  an opportunity to get rid of another cheap power supply (the switch). The Patio is run off Sonos which is located about a meter from the main units. I usually leave the Sonos unplugged unless in use.

 

Considering where I have to locate stuff heat is an issue and most  the units run pretty cool. Would the Optical rendu run cooler at 6v or even 5v and does voltage impact sound quality?

[barrows]

@Michaelb4, lower voltage into the opticalRendu will not effect its performance (as long as one stays within the voltage spec).  All internal voltages are regulated.  I would recommend 7VDC input, and for best performance I would prefer to see a dedicated supply for both the DAC and opticalRendu rather than the shared supply you are using now.  Absolutely, lower input voltage for the opticalRendu will result in lower operating temperature as the internal regulators will be dropping less voltage. 

[jabbr]

5 hours ago, barrows said:

What John Swenson appears to be suggesting is that the incoming phase noise signature gets attenuated by the the re-clocking, but not entirely eliminated.  It is very interesting at this point, and the anecdotal reports of significant improvements with the opticalModule (while using an opticalRendu or Signature Rendu SEoptical).  Note when I say "significant" improvement, I mean in audiophile terms-could be just a slight bit more ambience retrieval (as an example) which might not even be noticed by a non-audiophile type listener, but might be very meaningful to an audiophile with a well sorted high end system.

 

Agreed that we expect the oR to make the biggest difference. The opticalModule is anecdotally a big difference over what? A $25 FMC ... ok I’ll buy that.

 

But compared to my Brocade 10G switch with a 1g single mode SFP, supplied by my Mellanox 100G NIC with a 10G SFP? I guess I’m saying that the 10G and up networking equipment is generally so good, and is used in the Internet backbone that I don’t worry. I’ve compared these Mellanox vs Intel vs Solarflare NICs and I don’t get a hint of SQ difference, to the point where we can forget about a reasonably good server or NAS having “SQ”

[vortecjr]

9 hours ago, Summit said:

 

Am not sure you understand me correctly. I agree with John that there is a lot of misunderstanding regarding isolation floating around in audio circles. I and many others have heard the effect of using better digital components upstream of the renderer. That includes clocks. LAN cards and PSU on server and switch etc.

 

It is of course good if we would know the mechanism and exact reason to why clocks, PSU and other things have an impact on sound on upstream gear, but even without the technical explanation, if I can hear the effect clearly it what’s really matter.    

I did and we are good. I just wanted to be sure you and others understood my position. I'm also okay with people hearing differences. 

[vortecjr]

Okay we are some what off topic now. Let's try to focus on the opticalRendu.