UpTone Audio EtherREGEN Listening Impressions

[lmitche]

As one of the lucky EtherRegen beta testers, I can now talk about my impressions. In short, installing the EtherRegen had an immediate and positive impact on SQ quality here. It is powered by one of the LT3045 rails of my Hdplex 200 watt LPS. The 'A' side links to both a Linksys RE9000 LAN extender and a Roon server with the 'B' side connected to my NUC i7 endpoint.

 

For over five years I have experimented with various products and configurations to gain better SQ by tweaking the Ethernet end of one and two boxes solutions. This started with learning to bridge server NICs under Windows and Linux. This technique was later popularized by others as a "Novel Approach and Massive Improvement" in sound quality. Products tested include Tplink Fiber Media Controllers, Emosystems and Baaske medical transformers, Netgear FS105, FS108 and Cisco 2950 switches all with LT3045 double regulation and running at 100 or 1000mbps, various cables from Blue Jeans cable, Supra, Monoprice, etc ... were used with and without external shielding. On top of this, most recently I settled on 5ghz WiFi connections and USB3.0 NICs with success. Without the EtherRegen 5ghz WiFi sounds better than a direct wired connection from endpoint to the network extender.

 

When the EtherRegen arrived, I disabled the WiFi connection on my NUC endpoint, enabled the NUC LAN port and ran a 10 foot Monoprice Slimrun cable to the EtherRegen 'B' side. The network extender and server were connected with two 3 foot connections to the EtherRegen 'A' side.  SQ took an instant jump. I then realized that while it was not in use, the WiFi card in my NUC was still installed. The EtherRegen enabled physical removal of this card and doing so delivered another bump up in SQ.

 

I was thrilled and called Alex to share my findings. He was hearing a similiar improvement with his AL/NUC based system as well.

 

The EtherRegen is a terrific new technology that is going to benefit most systems.

[lmitche]

3 hours ago, Crimmind said:

Thanks for your reply. Do you use ER ground screw when connected to Hdplex. I'm a little worried about breaking the galvanic isolation when using ER to Hdplex if not using the ground screw. I guess a have to try and figure it out when I receive my ER this week. 

I can't hear any difference with or without the ground attached so removed it.

[lmitche]

9 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

I'm still in the process of writing the paper that goes into great detail about all this. I wanted to include some actual measurements of systems with and without the EtherREGEN, but I'm having some trouble getting measurements made. The super sensitive jitter analyzer I recently acquired cannot be directly connected to the circuits, I have to build an interface circuit and the first one did not work, I've designed a completely new one which should not have the problems of the first one, but the board has not come yet. With the holiday it won't be here until Tuesday, then I have to solder all the parts in etc, that will take a little while, then try and get it to work properly with the test equipment. Its all taking much more time (and money) than I had hoped.

 

So I'm not sure whether I should just finish the paper and post it or wait for real measurements.

 

John S.

John,

 

Your paper will have much greater impact if the theory is backed up with experimental evidence.

 

While my curiosity on the subject of this paper is as high as anyone else, without evidence it's just presenting another guess as to what's going on. I have already collected plenty of guesses on this topic, including one about wave interference. One more guess, even from someone for whom I hold in high esteem such as yourself, won't have the weight of empirical evidence.

 

Plus there is always the possibility that the observed data doesn't fit the model and the theory needs to change.

 

It sounds like you are close to the finish line. Don't get distracted. Keep your eye on the goal.

 

Just my two cents.

 

Larry

[lmitche]

59 minutes ago, Dutch said:

Hi Larry, just to be 100% sure: in this case we’re all really talking about changes in  your server on the A side of the ER so not your endpoint on the B-side?

Yes, the server is on the A-side.

 

The EtherRegen completely crushes the myth that an ultra clean ethernet source isolating the endpoint and DAC from upstream pollution will act as prophylactic for downstream devices.  Instead it appears to be the opposite making it easier to hear upstream enhancements downstream.

 

 

[lmitche]

27 minutes ago, Dutch said:

it can’t be true that the etherREGEN will make upstream stuff matter less

There are many that anticipated that this would be true.

 

Maybe we should say that the etherregen removes a weak link in the chain, revealing  weaker links on both the 'A' and 'B' sides. When those remaining weak links are strengthened the impact is easier to hear.

[lmitche]

3 hours ago, Superdad said:

The problem I have with them--aside from the snide remarks, defamation, and follow-the-leader sycophantry--is the general lack of intellectual curiosity.

Gee Alex, perhaps we have seen this behavior somewhere else as well?

[lmitche]

10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I guess you have to be on the other side to see the irony of this statement, Alex. What distinguishes scientific curiosity is the method of validating the proposed theories, not the invention of new ones. An 11th century court magician would say that the 21st century scientists lack "intellectual curiosity" since they refuse to try magic.

 

I'm available to respond to follow-ups on ASR, or on another general thread here, on AS since this is OT here.

To be fair to Alex, he used the phrase "intellectual curiosity" not "scientific curiosity". As you say, they have different meanings.  Do you mean to disparage intellectual curiosity?

[lmitche]

12 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

predictive model

Or explanatory?

[lmitche]

18 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Explanatory model is not sufficient if it lacks predictive power. Magic is an explanatory model.

Of course, but you argue from the extreme.

 

In the case of audio, I am interested in explanatory models for what I observe. If that explanation leads to a model with predictive power, the quality of those predictions tell me if the explanatory model is useful. But without the explanatory model further progress is difficult.

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I agree, the explanatory model is a necessary first step. But just like with the intellectual curiosity, it is not enough by itself. If a new explanation conflicts with known validated models, it must have at least as good a predictive power as the existing models, otherwise it can't replace them.

 

Folks at ASR can be brutal on anyone who proposes just an explanation, especially one that conflicts with other established models. But hey, it's not like that's very different from the reaction here to the posts on ASR

Ok good, so we can say that before Newton published his universal law of gravity one could observe that apples fell from trees. We can also say that before this explanation we could predict that apples fell from trees. And so, while the explanation exposed the underlying power laws, etc . . . one could both observe and predict the behavior of apples falling from trees long before the explanation existed.

 

This is what is strange about ASR. Alex makes the point that ASR people don't seem open to observation of audio system behaviors that can't be explained or measured, despite being observable or predictable. After all, apples didn't start falling from trees the moment Newton's law was written down. What's going to happen if the equivalent of Newtons law of audio is published and supported by measurements. At that point ASR people will be able to hear the differences between components?

 

OK, OK, I'm done.

 

 

 

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, RickyV said:

 

Here it is.

 

 

RickyV, thanks for sharing!
 

@Superdad congratulations for another "Best of the Best" review!