Jump to content
sahmen

opticalModule with other manufacturer's gear

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

 I am trying to figure out whether I can use the opticalmodule with a non-Sonore Roon bridge such as the Metrum Acoustics Ambre, and I can't help wondering what one should do with the ethernet cable that is inside the Ambre itself in such a set up:

 

spacer.png

 

Is it just my imagination, or is it counterintuitive, as I suspect it might be, to have the optical module clean up noise between the router and this unit, only to feed the signal to another cable which might be noisy or subpar in some way?

 

If so, then what is the best way to handle the RJ 45 cable inside the Ambre in such a scenario? I know someone overseas who has replaced that cable in the Ambre with a SOtM dCBL Cat6 cable (High grade Lan Port) and he is already praising the result even though he is not using any FMC between his router and the Ambre that I know of :

 

spacer.png

 

My question is whether using the OpticalModule with the Ambre, and then replacing the Ambre's Internal RJ 45 cable with the SOtM dCBL Cat6 HG cable (which is rather expensive too) might amount to a kind of needless noise overkill?

 

If so, how else does one solve this apparent problem regarding the standard (and most likely subpar) RJ 45 cable that is located inside the Ambre in order to ensure that the benefit of pairing the Ambre with an OpticalModule is not compromised in any way by that Ambre's internal RJ 45 cable?

 

Any helpful thoughts would be welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also one possible new configuration that has been suggested involves using "two optical Modules  connected by a short fiber to completely isolate your network DAC from noise on your network." Could someone kindly explain how this set up works to protect the DAC from network noise, in a way that using a single Optical Module cannot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sahmen said:

Also one possible new configuration that has been suggested involves using "two optical Modules  connected by a short fiber to completely isolate your network DAC from noise on your network." Could someone kindly explain how this set up works to protect the DAC from network noise, in a way that using a single Optical Module cannot?

I believe that is referring to a situation where  you don't have any optical ethernet setup anywhere in your system, you'd need 2 optical modules to get the full isolation from the optical ethernet. Otherwise you can't go optical to optical at any point, which is what you are after for full isolation. 

 

Cable ethernet input OM1>Optical output OM1>Optiical input OM2.>cable ethernet output OM2>standard network DAC or standard network streamer. Sonore is selling a bundle package of 2 OM's for this scenario. 

 

If you already have an optical ethernet setup of some type, you only need one OM  to convert to cable ethernet for input to your standard ethernet device: Optical Unit>OM>cable ethernet.

Another typical situation with one OM is where you are going cable ethernet>OM >OpticalRendu>USB device; this also  gives you 2 optical devices in series.  See: https://www.sonore.us/opticalModule.html 
 


Main listening (small home office):

Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>CAPS IV Pipeline Server + Sonore 12V PS >SOtM Lan Isolator>Bricasti M5 Network Player >Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.
 

Secondary Listening: CAPS Pipeline>IFi iOne DAC>Schiit Freya>Kii Three . Also an SBT and a RB Pi 3B+ running piCorePlayer as an SBT emulator. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sahmen said:

 I am trying to figure out whether I can use the opticalmodule with a non-Sonore Roon bridge such as the Metrum Acoustics Ambre, and I can't help wondering what one should do with the ethernet cable that is inside the Ambre itself in such a set up:

 

spacer.png

 

Is it just my imagination, or is it counterintuitive, as I suspect it might be, to have the optical module clean up noise between the router and this unit, only to feed the signal to another cable which might be noisy or subpar in some way?

 

If so, then what is the best way to handle the RJ 45 cable inside the Ambre in such a scenario? I know someone overseas who has replaced that cable in the Ambre with a SOtM dCBL Cat6 cable (High grade Lan Port) and he is already praising the result even though he is not using any FMC between his router and the Ambre that I know of :

 

spacer.png

 

My question is whether using the OpticalModule with the Ambre, and then replacing the Ambre's Internal RJ 45 cable with the SOtM dCBL Cat6 HG cable (which is rather expensive too) might amount to a kind of needless noise overkill?

 

If so, how else does one solve this apparent problem regarding the standard (and most likely subpar) RJ 45 cable that is located inside the Ambre in order to ensure that the benefit of pairing the Ambre with an OpticalModule is not compromised in any way by that Ambre's internal RJ 45 cable?

 

Any helpful thoughts would be welcome.

I don't think the quality of the Ambre's internal cable necessarily has anything to do with the use of an OM. Either the cable can be improved upon or not.
As far as the SOtM cable - it's an ethernet noise filter, which is why it may be helping your friend's setup. You'd need to ask Sonore if there is a point/need for it with an OM. Note that full exploitation of the Optical ethernet isolation requires both optical input and optical output at some point in your chain, not just one OM.


Main listening (small home office):

Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>CAPS IV Pipeline Server + Sonore 12V PS >SOtM Lan Isolator>Bricasti M5 Network Player >Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.
 

Secondary Listening: CAPS Pipeline>IFi iOne DAC>Schiit Freya>Kii Three . Also an SBT and a RB Pi 3B+ running piCorePlayer as an SBT emulator. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, firedog said:

I don't think the quality of the Ambre's internal cable necessarily has anything to do with the use of an OM. Either the cable can be improved upon or not.
As far as the SOtM cable - it's an ethernet noise filter, which is why it may be helping your friend's setup. You'd need to ask Sonore if there is a point/need for it with an OM. Note that full exploitation of the Optical ethernet isolation requires both optical input and optical output at some point in your chain, not just one OM.

 

@firedog : Thanks for both of your helpful responses... I do have one additional question regarding your last statement about the requirement of Optical ethernet isolation at both the optical input and optical output ends in the chain, and what that means for the approach I am taking...  I have just purchased one optical module to use with my ultrarendu, which I see as an interim configuration to use, pending my eventual purchase of the opticalRendu.  I suspect the optical module and opticalRendu pairing will satisfy the optical input/optical output requirement you have specified, but until I do purchase the opticalRendu, I shall have only one optical module and the ultrarendu... Are you saying that in order for my ultrarendu to derive the full benefits of optical ethernet isolation, it is going to need a second OpticalModule too?

 

At any rate, I am not thinking of getting a second OM  in my present situation for my Ultrarendu, as I am deploying all extra resources I have toward the acquisition of the opticalRendu . However I still need confirmation of what your statement seems to imply about the ultrarendu and the benefits of optical ethernet isolation, namely that it would need two OMs for the optical isolation to work optimally... With it...  Is that the implication of your statement (the ultrarendu must have 2 OMs to work optimally?--i.e . I ask because I am wondering whether it would not be better to just sell the ultrarendu and get another opticalRendu + 1 OM pairing, under such circumstances. )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sahmen said:

 

@firedog : Thanks for both of your helpful responses... I do have one additional question regarding your last statement about the requirement of Optical ethernet isolation at both the optical input and optical output ends in the chain, and what that means for the approach I am taking...  I have just purchased one optical module to use with my ultrarendu, which I see as an interim configuration to use, pending my eventual purchase of the opticalRendu.  I suspect the optical module and opticalRendu pairing will satisfy the optical input/optical output requirement you have specified, but until I do purchase the opticalRendu, I shall have only one optical module and the ultrarendu... Are you saying that in order for my ultrarendu to derive the full benefits of optical ethernet isolation, it is going to need a second OpticalModule too?

 

At any rate, I am not thinking of getting a second OM  in my present situation for my Ultrarendu, as I am deploying all extra resources I have toward the acquisition of the opticalRendu . However I still need confirmation of what your statement seems to imply about the ultrarendu and the benefits of optical ethernet isolation, namely that it would need two OMs for the optical isolation to work optimally... With it...  Is that the implication of your statement (the ultrarendu must have 2 OMs to work optimally?--i.e . I ask because I am wondering whether it would not be better to just sell the ultrarendu and get another opticalRendu + 1 OM pairing, under such circumstances. )

 I'm definitely not the expert here, you should ask Jesus or John Swenson. These issues have been addressed elsewhere in the forum - I think you can find the answer if you look.  My understanding is they also feel the opticalRendu is a superior unit to the ultraRendu. But maybe I'm putting words in their mouth(s). 

My understanding is that the ultimate benefit is derived from an optical device (say an OM) feeding one of the optical Rendu devices; so what you are doing is an interim solution. 
If you are saving your money for an opticalRendu to pair with your OM, then why be so concerned with what you have now being the ultimate?   Just save your money for the OR, as that is your goal. 


Main listening (small home office):

Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>CAPS IV Pipeline Server + Sonore 12V PS >SOtM Lan Isolator>Bricasti M5 Network Player >Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.
 

Secondary Listening: CAPS Pipeline>IFi iOne DAC>Schiit Freya>Kii Three . Also an SBT and a RB Pi 3B+ running piCorePlayer as an SBT emulator. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, firedog said:

 I'm definitely not the expert here, you should ask Jesus or John Swenson. These issues have been addressed elsewhere in the forum - I think you can find the answer if you look.  My understanding is they also feel the opticalRendu is a superior unit to the ultraRendu. But maybe I'm putting words in their mouth(s). 

My understanding is that the ultimate benefit is derived from an optical device (say an OM) feeding one of the optical Rendu devices; so what you are doing is an interim solution. 
If you are saving your money for an opticalRendu to pair with your OM, then why be so concerned with what you have now being the ultimate?   Just save your money for the OR, as that is your goal. 

 

Yes, I have read John Swenson's post in the Optical Rendu forum, and found it to be very informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...