EtherREGEN: Installation, Usage, Difficulty, Questions thread

[R1200CL]

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/62298-the-isolation-thread/?do=findComment&comment=1117805

 

[sb6]

I purchased an EtherRegen + BG7TBL 10MHz OCXO clock powered by an HDPlex HD100 LPSU placed on 3 IsoAcoustics Orea and the difference compared to a Netgear switch was easily noticeable. I'd put it into 4 categories: Much improved PRAT, less gritty / glare from higher frequencies, a blacker background and more focused spatial cues including increased depth. Well worth the modest investment IMO.

 

My only questions are - should I ground the EtherRegen to the wall outlet powering the Niagara 3000 (which powers the HDPlex LPSU) since the Niagara doesn't have a ground terminal? Should the clock also be grounded along with the Etherregen? Thanks in advance for your assistance.

[JohnSwenson]

11 hours ago, PYP said:

Thank you, John.  The eRs themselves are powered by a LPS 1.2 and SMPS, respectively.  One leg of the JS-2 powers an external clock for eR #2.    If I add a second, separate clock for eR #1, and power that clock with the second leg of the JS-2, is the moat defeated (shared ground for the two clocks)?  

More than likely running both clocks off the same JS-2 will defeat the moat of the second ER. Whether that is a problem depends a lot on how things are hooked up. The primary purpose of the moat is to prevent leakage current (both low and high impedance) from the network from getting into the DAC. If the path from the first ER to the output of the second does not introduce any new leakage currents then the moat of the first ER may be sufficient.  This really needs a detailed drawing of the system to figure that out.

 

John S.

[TwinPeak]

I think I'm covered isolation/defeat wise with opticalModule Deluxe sitting in a sandwich between two EtherRegen's.

[PYP]

7 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

More than likely running both clocks off the same JS-2 will defeat the moat of the second ER. Whether that is a problem depends a lot on how things are hooked up. The primary purpose of the moat is to prevent leakage current (both low and high impedance) from the network from getting into the DAC. If the path from the first ER to the output of the second does not introduce any new leakage currents then the moat of the first ER may be sufficient.  This really needs a detailed drawing of the system to figure that out.

 

John S.

Thank you, John.  Given that adding a second eR resulted in a significant increase in density and weight, sonic qualities that I value, I definitely don't want to defeat the moat of the second eR.    Adding an opticalModule and the two eRs has given me a new appreciation for just how good the Tambaqui DAC is, and makes me curious about whether there are other ways to maximize the ethernet stream.  And it was very clearly demonstrated that the JS-2 was a wonderful partner to the Cybershaft clock, which lifted the performance of my first eR.  But it seems like it is time to simply enjoy the music.  

 

I have observed in the past that adding a component that reduces noise can improve sound for a week or so and then become less effective.  It makes me wonder if this is related to leakage currents and, if so, how much time it takes leakage currents to propagate through the system.    

[jamesg11]

I think JS’s look at diagrams includes leakage currents that may conduit via powerboards? - something often not seen in posted diagrams.

[JohnSwenson]

7 hours ago, PYP said:

Thank you, John.  Given that adding a second eR resulted in a significant increase in density and weight, sonic qualities that I value, I definitely don't want to defeat the moat of the second eR.    Adding an opticalModule and the two eRs has given me a new appreciation for just how good the Tambaqui DAC is, and makes me curious about whether there are other ways to maximize the ethernet stream.  And it was very clearly demonstrated that the JS-2 was a wonderful partner to the Cybershaft clock, which lifted the performance of my first eR.  But it seems like it is time to simply enjoy the music.  

 

I have observed in the past that adding a component that reduces noise can improve sound for a week or so and then become less effective.  It makes me wonder if this is related to leakage currents and, if so, how much time it takes leakage currents to propagate through the system.    

I'm not quite sure what you are getting with this. Leakage currents are electrical signals, thus they propagate through conductors at close to the speed of light. There ARE several things that can take days to change are oxidation levels on connectors and static buildup.

 

All the "isolation" being done to help block leakage currents can also leave a system susceptible to static charges developing between segments of a system which might change how things sound. These can build up over time.

 

John S.

[agladstone]

11 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

I'm not quite sure what you are getting with this. Leakage currents are electrical signals, thus they propagate through conductors at close to the speed of light. There ARE several things that can take days to change are oxidation levels on connectors and static buildup.

 

All the "isolation" being done to help block leakage currents can also leave a system susceptible to static charges developing between segments of a system which might change how things sound. These can build up over time.

 

John S.

So, if I understand correctly in theory, basically you’re saying that “less is more” in regards to leakage current and galvanic isolation of a system ? 
 

[JohnSwenson]

3 minutes ago, agladstone said:

So, if I understand correctly in theory, basically you’re saying that “less is more” in regards to leakage current and galvanic isolation of a system ? 
 

Not necessarily, what it really means is that every system is going to be different and there is no way to make "general rules" that work in all systems.

 

I think this level of tweaking things scares a lot of people into thinking that unless they do this they are going to have crap sound, this is NOT true. This is all about wringing the last bit of performance out of your system, which is going to be different for everybody.

 

At this level (where you have a very good system and you are trying to get that "scary realism" there are several sources that can impede the performance of the system. Unfortunately as you work to knock down one, you can increase another. Its all about finding the optimal place where the total is at a minimum.

 

So I guess I'm saying that there is a tendency to focus on one particular thing and then throw everything you can at that  and ignore everything else, this can wind up being a non optimal place. I thinks spreading around the attention and money on different aspects is the best way to go. You want every aspect to be very good and no one single thing to be "the absolute best no matter what". That usually means you have ignored some other aspect so it is only so-so.

 

This is what I do with all my designs, make sure that every aspect of the design is  very, very good, and nothing is extraordinarily good. For example if a design costs $1000 I don't have one part that costs $700. The most expensive part might be $50 and there are a bunch of parts in the $20 to $50 range. 

 

I think this is good to do in a system as well.

 

John S.

 

 

[agladstone]

8 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

Not necessarily, what it really means is that every system is going to be different and there is no way to make "general rules" that work in all systems.

 

I think this level of tweaking things scares a lot of people into thinking that unless they do this they are going to have crap sound, this is NOT true. This is all about wringing the last bit of performance out of your system, which is going to be different for everybody.

 

At this level (where you have a very good system and you are trying to get that "scary realism" there are several sources that can impede the performance of the system. Unfortunately as you work to knock down one, you can increase another. Its all about finding the optimal place where the total is at a minimum.

 

So I guess I'm saying that there is a tendency to focus on one particular thing and then throw everything you can at that  and ignore everything else, this can wind up being a non optimal place. I thinks spreading around the attention and money on different aspects is the best way to go. You want every aspect to be very good and no one single thing to be "the absolute best no matter what". That usually means you have ignored some other aspect so it is only so-so.

 

This is what I do with all my designs, make sure that every aspect of the design is  very, very good, and nothing is extraordinarily good. For example if a design costs $1000 I don't have one part that costs $700. The most expensive part might be $50 and there are a bunch of parts in the $20 to $50 range. 

 

I think this is good to do in a system as well.

 

John S.

 

 

Thanks as always for the explanation John!! 
So, instead of “less is more”, seems more like “your system is only as good as it’s worse component “ :) 

This philosophy overall is something that I’ve been building towards for years and years! 
Trying to get the level of the power supplies, power cables, isolation, network, etc to the similar level of the preamp, power amps, music server, DAC, Speakers, interconnects and so on! 
It’s a never ending “battle” because as soon as I think I’ve finally accomplished a reasonable level of equality within all components of my system, something like the EtherRegen or Iso-Regen, or LPS 1.2 comes out and I need to start all over again…. (So in other words, it’s all your fault!! Haha!!) 

[PYP]

1 hour ago, JohnSwenson said:

I'm not quite sure what you are getting with this. Leakage currents are electrical signals, thus they propagate through conductors at close to the speed of light. There ARE several things that can take days to change are oxidation levels on connectors and static buildup.

 

All the "isolation" being done to help block leakage currents can also leave a system susceptible to static charges developing between segments of a system which might change how things sound. These can build up over time.

 

John S.

Thank you.  The role of static was exactly what I was trying to ask about.  In my system, unplugging just one component can change restore the sound to its highest level if I haven't done that in a while.  It seems like it doesn't matter much which piece of gear in the chain gets unplugged, but DACs have always been a good place to start the experiment.   In the past, I've also tried the IsoTek "rejuvenation" (their term for it) disc.   Their theory is that playing the disc through the system de-magnetizes the system.  Was wondering what you thought about that theory.  

 

But there is also a different phenomenon from static, at least it seems separate from the static issue.  And that is that over time some noise reduction tweaks seem to lose efficacy.  Perhaps it just my ears getting used to the new sound over time and therefore no longer hearing the "large" change that first occurred.   

[GMG]

Maybe it was already covered somewhere but there are too many threads and answers around this so I have to ask myself :-)

I plan to add an optical Rendu to my system and my question about recommended chain with ER and Optical Rendu, with and without Optical Module Deluxe

what would you guys recommend:

1. Router --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
2. Router --> ER copper B to Optical A side --> Optical Rendu
3. Router --> Copper ER A to B --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
4. Router --> standard optical converter --> Optical ER A side to  Copper B side --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu

My tendency is to think that option 2 is probably the simplest and best configuration, but then I'm left with nothing to do with my optical module deluxe :-),

Option 3 on one hand uses the ER in the preferred orientation but on the other hand adds the Optical module deluxe as another piece in the chain. 

[Mike Rubin]

44 minutes ago, GMG said:

Maybe it was already covered somewhere but there are too many threads and answers around this so I have to ask myself :-)

I plan to add an optical Rendu to my system and my question about recommended chain with ER and Optical Rendu, with and without Optical Module Deluxe

what would you guys recommend:

1. Router --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
2. Router --> ER copper B to Optical A side --> Optical Rendu
3. Router --> Copper ER A to B --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
4. Router --> standard optical converter --> Optical ER A side to  Copper B side --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu

My tendency is to think that option 2 is probably the simplest and best configuration, but then I'm left with nothing to do with my optical module deluxe :-),

Option 3 on one hand uses the ER in the preferred orientation but on the other hand adds the Optical module deluxe as another piece in the chain. 

I use option 2 with my optical Rendu.

 

My ER replaced an Optical Module (original version), which replaced a TrendNet FMC.  The ER is a clear SQ upgrade.

 

I have no idea if other options work better, but, if you have a new OM Deluxe, it’s easy enough to test option 3.  
 

I didn’t bother.  Instead, I used my TrendNet FMC and the OM to introduce an optical segment in the chain connecting the ultraRendu in my second system to the router.

[André Gosselin]

8 hours ago, GMG said:

Maybe it was already covered somewhere but there are too many threads and answers around this so I have to ask myself :-)

I plan to add an optical Rendu to my system and my question about recommended chain with ER and Optical Rendu, with and without Optical Module Deluxe

what would you guys recommend:

1. Router --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
2. Router --> ER copper B to Optical A side --> Optical Rendu
3. Router --> Copper ER A to B --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
4. Router --> standard optical converter --> Optical ER A side to  Copper B side --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu

My tendency is to think that option 2 is probably the simplest and best configuration, but then I'm left with nothing to do with my optical module deluxe :-),

Option 3 on one hand uses the ER in the preferred orientation but on the other hand adds the Optical module deluxe as another piece in the chain. 

Go with option 2 and forget about the Optical Module. I once had two of those in my system, and never could feel they improved SQ. I returned them. But as always, this is system dependent.

[R1200CL]

16 hours ago, GMG said:

what would you guys recommend:

Or just purchase the $99 Mikrotik. (And expand from there). That’s actually the cheapest way to utilize the opticalRendu. Leaving cheap FMC out. There is also the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X as a good option. I taught they had a SFP+ option as well. Couldn’t find now. 

 

Please use single mode fiber in whatever you do. 
 

If you want the EtherRegen, you should get the 50 ohm version. That won’t make any restrictions in selecting the best (AfterDark) clocks.

 

People really shouldn’t purchase the 75 ohm version, if they ever think they will experiment with external clock. 
 

I predict in 3 to 4 years form now, clock interfaces will be optical. So in the end I may not matter 😂

[GMG]

Thanks. 
I already own the ER and OMD

I’m adding the optical rendu

 

already running single mode today from OMD to ER and then from B side to network player (miniDSP SHD Studio, which I’m replacing with OR, as I no longer need the HW solution  for Dirac - found a perfect way to implement Dirac with Roon/HQPlayer)

[GryphonGuy]

On 6/14/2021 at 2:10 PM, GMG said:

Maybe it was already covered somewhere but there are too many threads and answers around this so I have to ask myself :-)

I plan to add an optical Rendu to my system and my question about recommended chain with ER and Optical Rendu, with and without Optical Module Deluxe

what would you guys recommend:

1. Router --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
2. Router --> ER copper B to Optical A side --> Optical Rendu
3. Router --> Copper ER A to B --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu
4. Router --> standard optical converter --> Optical ER A side to  Copper B side --> Optical Module Deluxe --> Optical Rendu

My tendency is to think that option 2 is probably the simplest and best configuration, but then I'm left with nothing to do with my optical module deluxe :-),

Option 3 on one hand uses the ER in the preferred orientation but on the other hand adds the Optical module deluxe as another piece in the chain. 

 

Since you already have the OM deluxe and ER, you could experiment with options 1, 2 or 3. Choose the option that sounds best to you. If it works best with all boxes in place, good, if you end up with a spare box, you can keep it as back-up or sell it for some extra pocket money.

 

As others have said, use single mode optical fibre with 1310nm wavelength transceivers to give your system the best chance at great audio.

 

Cheers

GG

[R1200CL]

20 hours ago, GMG said:

I already own the ER and OMD

I’m adding the optical rendu

Then I suggest as option 5 in your list: placing the opticalModule upfront the EtherRegen, which requires a switch or router upfront with a SFP/SFP+
 

Reason to suggest  it’s been widely reported that a better clock upfront the EtherRegen helps. 
(I’m doing this myself). 
 

How will you power the opticalRendu ?

And what is the opticalRendu replacing ?

[GMG]

Thanks. 
That’s an interesting option. 
I will start by powering the OR with the SGC power supply and eventually upgrade to Farad. 

[Johnnydev]

12 hours ago, GryphonGuy said:

As others have said, use single mode optical fibre with 1310nm wavelength transceivers to give your system the best chance at great audio.

I'm not sure about that. I have the 3 pieces afterdark groupbuy SFP+ modules here. I use them between 2 EtherRegens, but the 1310 nm version is certainly not the best sounding here.

[GryphonGuy]

11 hours ago, Johnnydev said:

I'm not sure about that. I have the 3 pieces afterdark groupbuy SFP+ modules here. I use them between 2 EtherRegens, but the 1310 nm version is certainly not the best sounding here.

 

Ooh a tease. I like it.

 

Which wavelength transceivers sounded best there?

Are you using single mode or multimode fibre?

 

Regards

GG

[PLGA]

Hello guys

I bought a pair of this SFP modules, as recomended by Alex:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00U77VPX2/

 

to connect with my ER and my Ubiquiti ER-X-SFP Router, but it doesn´t work. The seller of it told me it should work with my router, but it doesn't. It seems that the ER and the Ubiquiti don't recognize each other. 

 

Just by chance, has anyone tried this SFP module with this router or another Ubiquiti one? Any advice? Can it be something related with configuration of the Router?

 

I've already tried pushing the SFP connectors firmly into the SFP sockets with no result.

 

Thank you!!

 

[electrafixion]

When I bought my ER it worked fine when connect to my router via CAT5/6, but I couldn't get it to connect via fiber so I too assumed it was related to SFP compatibility.  Eventually I determined the issue was a setting in the router which had to be changed when using fiber with the ER.  Here's what I posted at the time:

 

"The issue turned out to be a setting in my smart / managed TP-Link switch.  The EtherREGEN wants the duplex setting on its port to be  "auto" instead of the default setting of "full".  

 

Since that time I've tried several different SFPs (TP-Link & 10-Gtek multi-mode, Finisar single-mode) and they all work flawlessly with the ER.

[yoby]

I'm trying to set up a Small Green Computer Sonicorbiter i5 that I recently bought. I've been using a Windows 10 (Home version) PC with the Ether Regen that follows my router. I PC wasn't seeing the Sonicorbiter (I had them both plugged into the Ether Regen). I got Andrew Gillis on the phone to help me troubleshoot and found out from him that there are compatability issues between the Ether Regen and  the Sonicorbiter I5.  He said to plug it into the router instead. I did that and now can see the Sonicorbiter i5. My question is does this degrade the sound quality? TIDAL sounds more grainy to me now. I'm still having trouble with "click and drag" for the music files I have burned into the PC . I'm not sure how to do it. Can someone recommend a simple tutorial for me on how to do this? Good listening. Jeff L

 

 

[Superdad]

7 hours ago, yoby said:

I got Andrew Gillis on the phone to help me troubleshoot and found out from him that there are compatability issues between the Ether Regen and  the Sonicorbiter I5. 

Sorry, but Andrew is incorrect.  There are many EtherREGEN owners with the SonicTransporter i5.  Please contact me directly--including a description of your connections and location on the network of whatever is running your Roon Core server. We can assist you from there.

Thanks,

--Alex C.