Networked DACs and network speed?

[plissken]

3 hours ago, Dutch said:

Possibilities I can quickly think of:

 

higher bandwidth (spectrum wise) in use for gigabit
4 pairs vs 2 in use in the network cable

Different mode of operation of the PHY

Higher load on all circuits following the PHY including but not limited to CPU and memory could cause more processing noise

 

 

I would love for Jesus to sit down blind at a switch that I can remotely, on the fly, change wire speed and evaluate.

[Miska]

3 hours ago, Dutch said:

higher bandwidth (spectrum wise) in use for gigabit
4 pairs vs 2 in use in the network cable

Different mode of operation of the PHY

 

Gigabit uses primarily more complex signal, a bit like if you compare 2G/3G/4G mobile networks; frequency band usage is largely the same, but same frequency band can carry more information due to larger constellations and advanced signaling methods.

 

While higher frequencies have less penetration than lower ones.

 

3 hours ago, Dutch said:

Higher load on all circuits following the PHY including but not limited to CPU and memory could cause more processing noise

 

I would say unlikely, because the transfer/idle time ratio is much less favorable at lower speeds. While at higher speeds there is more idle time where the hardware can power down. This is especially notable for CPU and memory. This specifically favors use of higher speeds where you quickly do something and then sleep longer. Rather than staying awake for long periods of time and running inefficient idle loops more and maybe not having time to enter sleep states at all.

 

In addition, many of the power saving features are typically either only available at Gbps standards, or more efficient (802.3az).

 

[Miska]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy-Efficient_Ethernet

[Dutch]

At this point we’re all but making up theories. People report differences in SQ that was and still is enough for me to test for myself.

 

I’m in IT networking/network security but know that my professional knowledge can’t explain the plethora of things I’ve often though to be impossible to still make a difference in my system.
 

Here’s John Swenson’s take on it BTW: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/38968-etherregen-early-general-details-please-dont-ask-too-many-questions-yet/?do=findComment&comment=802257

 

Quote

Why is the clean output 10/100 not gigabit? Because it is much cleaner to do so. A significant amount of jitter on a Ethernet cable come from noise on the power/ground (PG) networks inside the chip. The more stuff is going on and the faster it is doing it, the more noise gets generated on the PG network. Gigabit has way more stuff going on inside, thus generates a lot more noise, which causes significantly more jitter. By keeping it down to 100 the clean port has much lower jitter.

 

[plissken]

2 minutes ago, Dutch said:

At this point we’re all but making up theories. People report differences in SQ that was and still is enough for me to test for myself.

 

I’m in IT networking/network security but know that my professional knowledge can’t explain the plethora of things I’ve often though to be impossible to still make a difference in my system.
 

Here’s John Swenson’s take on it BTW: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/38968-etherregen-early-general-details-please-dont-ask-too-many-questions-yet/?do=findComment&comment=802257

 

 

 

Claims without evidence are just as easily dismissed without evidence. I'll keep open the offer to send out a 10/100/1000 switch where I can remote into it and by CLI change port speeds on the fly.

 

I think it would behoove a manufacturer to do this as it will give them more than just a veneer of credibility.

[Dutch]

These manufacturers already have plenty of credibility with the people that matter to them.

 

For now I’ll just await my batch 1 etherregen, then put it in my system and enjoy some tunes! 😄 Enjoy the rest of the discussion I’m out.

[plissken]

19 minutes ago, Dutch said:

These manufacturers already have plenty of credibility with the people that matter to them.

 

For now I’ll just await my batch 1 etherregen, then put it in my system and enjoy some tunes! 😄 Enjoy the rest of the discussion I’m out.

 

Oooookay.

[Ralf11]

On 10/27/2019 at 2:28 PM, miguelito said:

  AudioStream

 

I believe the source of the noise has been located.

[plissken]

I love how I offer a perfect way to evaluate all of this and the 'I'm not listening, la la la' mantra kicks in.

[Allan F]

48 minutes ago, plissken said:

I love how I offer a perfect way to evaluate all of this and the 'I'm not listening, la la la' mantra kicks in.

 

I don't doubt that it is really difficult for you, but try to live with it.

[Dutch]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

Gigabit uses primarily more complex signal, a bit like if you compare 2G/3G/4G mobile networks; frequency band usage is largely the same, but same frequency band can carry more information due to larger constellations and advanced signaling methods.

one last thing; I know the encoding technique differs and the clock rate may be the same at 125MHz but gigabit ethernet uses a bigger bandwidth compared to fast ethernet. See this for example: https://www.flukenetworks.com/knowledge-base/applicationstandards-articles-copper/mhz-vs-mbits-and-encoding

[Miska]

52 minutes ago, Dutch said:

one last thing; I know the encoding technique differs and the clock rate may be the same at 125MHz but gigabit ethernet uses a bigger bandwidth compared to fast ethernet. See this for example: https://www.flukenetworks.com/knowledge-base/applicationstandards-articles-copper/mhz-vs-mbits-and-encoding

 

IMO, that is not a problem. Energy wise 10x or 100x longer transmitter and chip activity is more of a problem.

 

Unfortunately Ethernet doesn't use spread spectrum clocking and randomized frequency hopping like military radios for example do.

 

[plissken]

3 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

I don't doubt that it is really difficult for you, but try to live with it.

 

Actually this stuff is trivial for me. It's the Luddites you should be concerned with.

 

The fact that no one has figured out, even though being beaten over the head with it, that GB and faster speeds along with better power saving techniques means that the NIC isn't even totally powered on during computer or renderer use is mind boggling.

 

Stupidity is ignorance willfully left uncorrected.

 

 

[Allan F]

15 minutes ago, plissken said:

The fact that no one has figured out, even though being beaten over the head with it, that GB and faster speeds along with better power saving techniques means that the NIC isn't even totally powered on during computer or renderer use is mind boggling.

 

Not only mind boggling, but truly of uncalculable social and technical impact and importance. The Luddites have no idea of the extent of their loss.

[Ralf11]

35 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Actually this stuff is trivial for me. It's the Luddites you should be concerned with.

 

The fact that no one has figured out, even though being beaten over the head with it, that GB and faster speeds along with better power saving techniques means that the NIC isn't even totally powered on during computer or renderer use is mind boggling.

 

Stupidity is ignorance willfully left uncorrected.

 

 

 

seems to have missed part of your reply

[jabbr]

On 10/27/2019 at 1:54 PM, miguelito said:

I had read that network speed should be fast enough but not faster. The idea is the higher the speed, the more electrical noise generated. In this vein, I see both the Melco audiophile router as well as the EtherRegen have connections to audio endpoints at 100Mbps rather than 1000Mbps.

 

So first question: Has it been established that connections at 100Mbps are better for audio?

 

Not true. Although copper Ethernet uses more power for higher speeds, that’s not generally true for Optical. In fact it’s the opposite — the faster speeds require a tighter eye pattern. Substantially tighter. 

[Miska]

In addition, of course with a good switch and Ethernet interfaces, EEE cable length detection is used and only amount of power needed for the particular cable length is used. For example Cisco switch supports this only at Gbps speeds.

 

It is kind of pointless to blast at power specified for 100m cable length if the cable is just 2m long...