The EtherREGEN thread for various network, cable, power experiences and experiments

[GryphonGuy]

18 minutes ago, Mike Rubin said:

My recollection is that Uptone said that a single copper input into the B side and only an SFP on the A side retained the benefits of going from A to B with copper, but I could be remembering incorrectly. I only have one used mine with copper going from B to A and optical from A to the Rendu.  I can't speak to the differences between A to B and B to A sound quality because I am unable to compare them, but I was under the impression that Uptone management believed that I wasn't giving up any by going out from the SFP.  

 

My audio network is fibre based so all transmissions are fibre on the A side. Every transmission for me is B>A then A>B as I have two etherREGENs, one next to my PC and one next to my audio router/distributor. So when I record to PC the analogue signal hits the audio router's ADC card and is sent to out via B>A then arriving at my PC A>B. Likewise, when playing back, the PC sends B>A to the awaiting DAC card in Audio router via A>B. So whatever the effect of B>A vs A>B, I am getting it at all times, and I can tell you it is pretty amazing, no, let me revise to awe-inspiring at the realism. I am just about to publish my findings of a good week of testing various combinations of cabling and fibre transceivers in my system.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

 

First of all, thanks to those of you who offered advice and recommendations during my tests. This was both educational and then fun to hear the differences as I changed just about every connection at one time or another. I said I was going to go off and buy dedicated single-mode transceivers but I ended up buying more single-mode fibre too.

 

So first of all let me address the loss of bass, accentuating non-bass sounds and the flattening of the soundstage using dual-mode 1310nm wavelength signals over single-mode fibre in my last post. Replacing the dual-mode SFP+ transceivers with dedicated single-mode SFP+ transceivers brought back the bass but the soundstage was still flat (no depth). I perceived the image to be at the tip of my nose using headphones.

 

So I reverted to the dual-mode 1310nm over multi-mode fibre. This allowed the tonal balance to return and a fairly deep soundstage. Whew!

 

So I looked at the fibre connection to the server. I changed it from 850nm multi-mode to intel compatible SFP+ 1310nm single-mode transceivers. This provided nice sonic purity uplift and little to no depth removal. Nice!

 

So I put the EtherREGENs back to single-mode SFP+. Wow. The sound was quite nice but still a bit “off”. Slightly better sonic purity than before and a depth about the same.

 

So by looking at the schematic diagram below, I knew that my PC was dragging the music over its normal network connection before sending out the dedicated Audio VLAN (Audio VLAN was now all single-mode SFP+ 1310nm wavelength). That normal PC connection was still at 850nm multi-mode fibre. So I switched that out for SFP+ single-mode 1310nm fibre as well and … Holy Crap Batman! The transient attacks of drums and percussion instruments was palpable. The depth immense (I perceived some sounds to be about 3 metres or more behind the singer, for example). So it was my PC’s normal connection dragging down the soundscape all this time. Interesting that the server and my PC have the exact same model intel fibre network card in them but the server only made a small change to the sound versus my PC a huge change.

 

But after listening for an album or two of familiar music, the best way to describe the sound was that it was shiny. Slightly too much emphasis on the high frequencies for my liking.

 

Just in time, the Finisar FTLX1475D3BTL SFP+ transceivers (made in Malaysia about 1 hour from where I am staying, by-the-way but cannot buy here!!!!) arrived from the USA. So I replaced the EtherREGEN SFP+ modules with the Finisars and in the switch as well. OUCH! Flat soundstage again and overly “fat” sounding with the space between the instruments and voices disappearing and were replaced with wall-to-wall sound. Mid-bass was bloated. “Let them run-in” my brain said, “they are electrical components after all”. So I left them running for about 3 hours and returned. Bummer! No real perceivable difference.

 

A lot of experimentation on positioning these expensive SFP+ modules then occurred.

 

The final iteration of Finisar placement was at the rear of the server only, one Finisar there added a nice touch of finesse to the sound without too much degradation. The switch was an FS SFP+ module. There was degradation and colouring but only marginally, and like a tube presentation, the colouration is “nice”. Ultimately the unlikable shine had been removed but a bit of colour added.

 

After days of settling, this combination (see diagram below) is simply amazing. Kick-drums sound very similar to real kick-drums in that the transient of the striker is fast with the after resonance very low and slow. Well I can feel that and I think that is what is making the sound seem so real. The clarity and positioning in the background of, say, a triangle struck just once can be very clearly heard along with its decay a long way back in the soundstage like it would if you heard it live.

 

What bugs me about my installation is that now my music goes through 4 conversions from light to electrical and 4 conversions from electrical to light. But somehow manages to sound as close to real audio as I think I am going to get out of electronic reproduction.

 

Of course, I am not stopping here. I still have to get customs to tell me how much for the taxes on the SR4T for my 2^nd EtherREGEN, and I am sure in the next few months I will have enough to buy a 10MHz external clock for both the EtherREGENs to see what more I can ring out of this system.

 

So to those of you who urged me to look into single-mode SFP+, I thank you. It has been an incredible journey of discovery and non-belief in what I was hearing at times. This hobby can be so much fun at times like these.

 

All the best

GG

 

PS. By way of explanation and for the keen-eyed, you’ll notice my PC has two network connections. I use Dante hardware and software to send audio throughout my setup and I keep that separated from my main network because of the constant network traffic synchronising clocks in the Dante devices. It is point-to-point protocols (non broadcast) but never-the-less, I chose to keep it separated.

 

[GryphonGuy]

23 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

With proper impedance matching exact cable length should not matter. If they are having length issues it may point to their cables not being proper impedance.

 

First thing I would do is reboot the router and see if the issues go away. If the problems go away then going with a different router is probably a good idea. As I mentioned I highly recommend running pfSense (free software) on a small reliable computer. It works very well, is highly configurable and does not have the "going slower" issue.

 

You can buy "appliances" with pfSense already loaded but they usually cost a lot more than doing it yourself.

 

John S.

 

Since changing from consumer router to pfsense router + separate switches, things never fail, and I can use the full internet bandwidth I am paying for. Here in Malaysia, the only compulsory device is the ISP provided fibre-to-copper media converter. Everything else after that can be your own equipment.

 

So a +1 for pfsense (if your ISP allows BYO Router).

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

7 minutes ago, agladstone said:

I will need to investigate pfsense! 
if it installs on a PC or stand alone device, is it software only vs hardware, or does it still use my router, but with the pfsense SW instead of Netgear (or other) firmware ? 

 

pfsense is not for the novice networker. There is a lot of setting up to do. Even if you buy the Netgate hardware, you may be paying for somebody to set it up for you as you wouldn't want to leave your front door open for ventilation in a trusting manner in this day and age.

 

My reason for changing was that the ISP provided wireless router just could not perform its duties when it had to route Wireless and wired signals at the same time. The average Malaysian household would be a few WiFi devices and maybe 1 wired device. I have approximately 20 devices half of which are IoT and the other half wired traditional devices.

 

I even used Ubiquiti gear (and still do for Wifi) but their software is a mess and the business model has to fail at some point as it is a self imposed pyramid selling scheme (they have to sell more and more devices with lifetime free support to keep the funds for development coming in). So I jumped ship a year or so ago. 

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

22 minutes ago, agladstone said:

I just looked at pfsense and also OPNsense and they both seem above and beyond my current tech ability, even the preconfigured HW Soluions (which all look really nice!). 
maybe there is a Lite version that can be loaded onto my Netgear to replace their own firmware? 

 

No "Lite" versions that I am aware of. Even if Netgear's hardware allowed third-party firmware, that's just a recipe for disaster 😪

[GryphonGuy]

12 minutes ago, brianbonf said:

Does anyone know if its recommended tp turn off the etherregen between usages?

 

The ER has an excellent audio clock within and should be kept at optimal temperature by keeping it powered. So for optimal audio processing, it should be left on. It is part of your network and your network should be on 24/7 too but for different reasons.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

41 minutes ago, watts said:

or nail polish. I hear green sounds best. 

 

🤣 I remember green marker pens were used on the edge of CD's to stop the red laser refracting/reflecting through the plastic disc.

[GryphonGuy]

11 hours ago, LewinskiH01 said:

Alex: sorry if this thread is not the best place to post, but didn't find a better one and does involve network and building around eR. Please move as you see fit.

 

What 8-channel audio cards are you using with eR? I have Lynx Hilo with additional Metrum Octave, but want to go to an 8-channel device, preferably fed from ethernet vs USB. Naturally my two eRs would be in the chain, but side B is not Gigabit so that rules out my top pick so far: Merging Hapi uses Ravenna, which demands Gigabit. Of course I could go Hapi and do without eR, but I appreciate what eR does to sound so want to build on it.

 

I am probably not the only one here doing active stereo 4-ways, so looking for your picks of ethernet-based 8-channel ADC/DAC cards with the best sound and that can run with eR. 

 

Thank you!

 

My PC has an audio subnet connected via an EtherRegen and a Focusrite Dante audio card. That Dante card demands a 1Gb/s connection so I purchased a TP-link TL-SG105E and powered it with the UltraCap LPS-1.2. with two short Cat-8 CableMatters patch cables from PC > TP-link > ER-B. I use fibre in the "A" side of the ER so this was the only option. Because I send only 2-channel 192kHz max over this connection, 100MBit/s is way over spec for that and works a treat.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

11 hours ago, LewinskiH01 said:

Thank you!

 

So your eR is in the network before your PC, and then another RJ45 in the PC is used for the "subnet" to connect thru the SG105E to your Focusrite? I guess you tried eR a>b between PC and Focusrite and didn't work because of Dante demands (demanding, even though not as much as Ravenna).

 

I do 8-channel at 24bit/192kHz and works without problem but have no Dante/Ravenna protocols imposed by the hardware.

 

I want to clean the rack a bit: today I have a PC, its LPS, two DACs, and could do with just an ethernet 8-channel interface and have the PC elsewhere. And in the switc, of course, would like to improve sound quality.

 

Maybe I should get a USB interface and have a small NAA behind it? And get around Ravenna/Dante.

 

The Focusrite card, from memory, senses 100Mbit/s speed and says please connect to 1Gb/s ethernet port or words to that effect. Very blatant and inoperative until it connects at 1Gb/s.

 

8 channels @ 24/192 runs to about 74Mb/s or 74-75% capacity of a 100Mb/s connection. I am always super conservative and don't design ethernet connections to run at more than 50% capacity due to overheads, packet broadcast requirements etc etc even in full-duplex connections. So you are lucky that it is currently working.

 

My own research found that single-mode fibre (commonly yellow colour) with 1310nm wavelength transceivers works best for audio.

 

Professional multi-channel USB interfaces are rare because it is so hard to do it well and be electrically quiet. Prism Sound in the UK do some high-end USB interfaces. I chose Avid MTRX for my interface as ethernet is much better with audio than USB electrically speaking, in my opinion and to my ears.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

3 hours ago, LewinskiH01 said:

Yeap. Prism Titan is one I had my eye on a while back (when I purchased Hilo), but to me makes sense that a good ethernet implementation should be better than a good usb implementation, so been looking for that.

 

Avid MTRX looks Pro Tools focused. Were you a Pro Tools user before buying the MTRX or you learnt for this application? 

How does the MTRX get along with the eR and the 100Mb/s?

Where in your chain is the single-mode optic fiber you mentioned?

 

Thanks for the input!

This is a simplified view. It doesn't show, for example, the Tp-link switch powered by Uptone Ultracap 1.2 to play a trick on the Dante audio card.

 

I am a Pro Tools licenced user but the MTRX operates completely independently from Pro Tools. Roon plays music to the MTRX via all the software routers. Roon sees it as just another endpoint. The MTRX has been configured with and will function with 4 x 24/192 channels saying it is using only 38Mb/s bandwidth on the 100Mb/s connection. I have had more channels configured but simply don't need it. It is the dante card in the PC that panics and refuses to work beyond 4 channels even though it too reports that only 38Mb/s is being used. I just live with the dante drama. LOL. The sound is really second to none.

 

I'll put a cat amongst the pigeons here and say that the MTRX as configured produces and much wider and deeper soundstage than my current Chord DAVE setup but Dave is using standard power (ATM) and standard high-end USB cable. But the Chord Dave just has the ability to pinpoint accurate timbres of instruments which, I think, points to slightly better timing. In the coming months I will upgrade the DAVE's power supply to the Sean Jacobs ARC6-DC4.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

6 hours ago, Encore said:

I have had the same thought  (also have two eR's). I'm a complete novice when it comes to optical. Do I need more than an fiber cable to connect the two eR's?

 

A lot of our collective testing in the early days of ER showed us that single-mode fiber (usually yellow in colour) with 1310nm wavelength SFP modules was a clear winner in SQ terms (for reasons unknown but the difference is not subtle). The most common connection of the fiber to the SFP module is LC-LC (locking connection both ends). Since then I think a handful of people have found some very niche brands and wavelengths to be marginally better but certainly this combination of Single-mode 1310nm is a great place to start (and for me I see no reason to experiment further as the results in my network and system are just stunning).

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

5 hours ago, andru26 said:

Which one do you recommend: Simplex Single Mode or Duplex Single Mode fiber?
As for the SPF what's recommended speed: 100BASE or 1000BASE?
Any other aspect to consider when choosing the fiber and SFP modules?

Many thanks!

 

Duplex and I use 10GB SFP+ as the ER doesn't seem to worry and handshakes back to its compulsory 1G and just connects, every time. So 100BASE SFP modules are incompatible with ER as far as I am aware.

 

The only thing you must be aware of is that your chosen SFP/SFP+ module must be setup internally (at manufacture) to be compatible with your brand of network switch (or router if it has a combined switch-router function). The switches with SFP/SFP+ usually say which branded SFPs they are compatible with. For example, my model of Netgear switch is compatible with Intel SFP/SFP+ modules so I order Intel SFP+ modules since the ER, again, doesn't play favourites with requiring certain branded SFP/SFP+ modules. The ER is certainly easy to live with and these days with its pristine audio networking, I cannot listen to audio pleasurably without it.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

.

[GryphonGuy]

18 hours ago, andru26 said:

 

I assume you're calling "ER" the Media Converter, correct?

The reason I asked about the 100BASE SFP was that there are reports that the lower 100Mbps speed these have gives a better sound quality. Do you have any information regarding the SFP speed < - > audio quality relation?

 

Regards,

Alexandru

 

You are in the EtherRegen (ER) thread, so my comments were all ON TOPIC (for once). 🤣

[GryphonGuy]

5 hours ago, Encore said:

 

OK, so with @GryphonGuy's help I got a couple of 1310 nm SFP modules and some single mode fiber optic cable.

 

In first instance, I have inserted it as shown in this diagram. From experimenting with Kapton tape on the earth connectors of Ethernet cables, I had established that the biggest improvement came from putting it on the 15 m long Ethernet cable that runs from my EoP outlet (probably some nasty SMPS in there).

 

So this cable goes in on the B side of the first eR. The Ethernet cable from the Roon core goes into the A side, so not quite ideal – it would have been better if I could connect both on the opposite site of the SFP port. But worth the try.

 

From the A side fiber optic goes to A side of the second eR. From the B side Ethernet cable goes to the streamer PC.

 

This gave a clear improvement. Transparency improved, making the soundstage feel bigger, I tend to turn the volume up more. Maybe the mids now feel a little recessed, something that is also a trait of my Emission Labs 300B XLS tubes. So maybe the sound from the DAC has become more balanced, exposing this character of the power tubes more than before.

 

In a funny way the sound has become almost too clean. Difficult to explain but especially at low volume the sound is a little less engaging. However, it is still early days, and I think the pros outweigh the cons. I don’t see myself be going back!

 

Some more experimenting is necessary, though. I want to try to replace the 15 meter Ethernet cable with fiber optical. However, that will move the SMPS of the first eR to a non-dedicated outlet. Difficult to predict what that will give. It gave an improvement to move the SMPS for the Macbook Pro away from the dedicated circuit breaker onto a regular one.

 

 

If the box called EOP is your upstream internet connection then it appears that external audio gets the 2-ER process whilst your onsite music on your Roon server only gets to go through one ER (crossing the moat where the magic happens, I mean). So what would be interesting is to try a song from your onsite Roon collection and then play that same song via that EOP box from the internet (Qobuz, Tidal etc). Just to see what differences there are in a double ER "Magic" process versus a single ER "Magic" process.

 

Sorry if the term "Magic" in relation to ER is offensive, it's the only way I know how to describe the awe-inspiring audio that the ER produces when signals cross its moat because I have no idea what is happening; just that the results are very pleasing to my ears in my system.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

4 hours ago, simon_pepper said:

John, Having been using the EtherREGEN since Nov 2019 with wired connections, is the use of SFP+ units with Fibre and an associated Media convertor to substitute the Ethernet ‘In’ into the A ports, worth the change & additional components on the output coming out of the B port?

Not unhappy with what I have, in fact completely happy, just wondering whether a fibre break will give anymore?

 

Changing to fibre on the A side of ER made a huge difference for me. I cannot go back to copper wire into A side anymore. I will qualify my statement with the fact that the fibre I use is 1310nm single mode (duplexed) with single mode transceivers. 850nm wavelength multi-mode is marginally better that copper wire but the 1310nm single mode fibre is in another league up the champions ladder so it is my recommended fibre solution for ER.

[GryphonGuy]

OM4 and OM5 are multimode fibre specs. The Finisars that most people here have been talking about are single-mode transceivers (I'm sure they also make multi-mode). The single/multi mode formats do not connect to each other in my experience. You must have single-mode fibre plugged into single-mode transceivers and vice versa.

 

You are the first person here to say that they prefer the sound of multi-mode audio transmissions over single-mode.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

 

14 hours ago, kostas6a3 said:

I am completely satisfied with the performance of my system so far.

Some Supra CAT8 cables I tried without the external patch cord attached degraded the SQ.

As for Roon Rock and Melco I have not understood what is meant. Roon Rock is the core and Melco is the server.

My original question is still unanswered.

Which optical fiber to use and which SFP module Finisar FTLF1318P3BTL or Finisar FTLX1475D3BTL ?

 

FTLF1318P3BTL is a 1gb/s transceiver

FTLX1475D3BTL is a 10gb/s transceiver

 

If the switch ports at both ends of your fibre cable are at the same speed it doesn't matter which one you buy. If one switch port is SFP (1gb/s) ER is this speed, and the other is 10gb/s then I would opt for the FTLF1318P3BTL 1gb/s model to save handshaking/connection issues with both ends being different default speeds.

 

I purchased the 10gb/s model and thought it was quite coloured in the sounds transported by it so I placed them where they least influenced the sound with their colour, feeding audio out from my NAS (the start of the audio transmission).

 

I use the Fiberstore (FS.COM) single-mode transceivers SFP-10GLRM-31 where it matters inside the ER SFP port. They seem very transparent (uncoloured) to my ears. As always YMMV.

[GryphonGuy]

21 hours ago, R1200CL said:

I suggest you use FTLF1421P1BCL instead of 1318. Also probably no need spending money on the 1475. 
 

You shall look for a yellow cable with blue connectors. (Single mode fiber). 

 

That model FTLF1421P1BCL is flagged as obsolete in some websites.

[GryphonGuy]

I have a newish EtherREGEN that I unboxed last night for a special project.

 

I run a dante audio system here for recording and general audio distribution. In simplistic terms dante is just ethernet with timing protocols and targetted broadcast messages on top to make sure data arrives in time to who its meant to be sent to.

 

I was having trouble getting the PC to communicate well over this new network extension. My existing network is mostly fibre but in this instance I had to use copper-only. Anyway in the traditional sense of input or network side being ER side "A" and the PC on "B", the timing protocol was reporting 46-48 millisecond latency (response time) when it should be a maximum of 6 milliseconds. Swapped the cable on the "A" side between the copper ports on the "A" side and nada. No difference. Still 46-48 milliseconds.

Then I had an idea and swapped so that the input or network side was side "B" and PC was now on the "A" side copper ports. 2-3 millisecond response time and now well within the 6 millisecond limit for good audio.

 

So who knew that "B" to "A" seems to have a faster path than "A" to "B"?

 

Just sayin'. No complaints.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

Further to my testing of Dante Virtual Soundcard software that had normal throughput on EtherREGEN when PC was connected to the  "A" side about 20 times faster than  when PC was connected to the "B" side.

 

I was able to establish that the software version (as opposed to the more common hardware cards) has become less tolerant of 100mbit interfaces than it used to be. So when the software saw it was on a 1gb/s network link ("A" to "B"), it happily sent its audio timing signals through the ER without problems even though the the network dropped to 100mb/s on the "B" side of the ER.

 

To make matters worse, this morning, the 9 year-old xeon computer I was testing on woke itself up, left a message on the screen that said its boot configuration had changed and then after I accepted that, it refused to start. So RIP to the old HP Xeon. A lot of good years of service. Lucky I replaced it about 18 months ago fearing this exact risk eventuating.

 

So the ER is not causing this anomaly. I swapped my existing ER with the newly unboxed one to see exact same behaviour with the now dead computer and the newly unboxed ER passed messages through on the hardware cards in hundreds of microseconds. So all good.

 

Can't wait for the revised ER to be finished for that 1gb/s "B" port. I'll buy four for my studio!!!

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

8 hours ago, ericuco said:

 
This sounds crazy to me. SFP’s are commercial (vs consumer) products primarily used in industrial applications (e.g. data centers, telecom). Hard to believe that when SFP’s are swapped out in industrial applications that the equipment is shutdown or other cables are removed, in order words, they can be hot swapped. I have hot swapped my SFP’s without issue and never remove other cables.

 

That said, perhaps some of the industry experts could chime in.

 

Correct. No data centre is going to pull out 96 or more cables from  a switch just to pull out an SFP or SFP+ transceiver or put one in. There is no difference to pulling out or plugging in a cat5,6,7 etc copper cable. The switch just copes.

 

When the SFP or SFP+ transceiver is inserted, it undergoes a communications handshake quite transparently and automatically. SO if there is no connection, it could be the fibre optic cable (have you used a multi-mode transceiver on single-mode cable or vice-versa). did the cable clip into the transceiver fully (assuming Locking Connection (LC-LC cable). Did the transceiver go all the way into the slot (some slots have quite some resistance against the circuit board engaging with the pins at the rear etc.

 

As a word of warning, I have had to restart the ER on very rare occasions (once or twice) when inserting a new SFP transceiver. It just copes with transceiver insertions and removals usually, not that I do that very often, but when gear is new, there is often more connecting and disconnecting than there should be. 😅

 

I am unaware if things change with consumer level gear and their SFP ports.

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

7 hours ago, kostas6a3 said:

I don't believe it, but whatever changes I made, all the other cables were connected to the switches and I was afraid that I might have caused some damage to the SFP modules, I also read the above.

 

Transceivers should not be abused. Normal two-fingered gripping should not do any damage. Dropping them onto the floor from adult height might cause problems with the laser so I wouldn't want to do that too often. You are more likely to damage the exacting fibre ends not inserting them into the transceiver with sufficient care that you scratch the fragile end and cause unwanted reflections and dispersions down the cable.

 

So just be careful around fibre and it will be AOK is what I am trying to say...I think. 🙃

 

Regards

GG

[GryphonGuy]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

One thing I’ve been struggling with is SFP+ modules designed or customized for specific hardware. For example, I talked to FS.com about connecting my Ubiquiti router’s SFP+ slot with a Netgear switch that has an SFP+ slot. FS told me it doesn’t recommend using modules slated to work with Ubiquiti, in the Netgear. They said they would create a custom module for me. 
 

But, this raises an issue too because I like using BiDi modules that transmit and receive on a single cable using different wavelengths. 
 

I wish there were some standards here 😳

 

FS.com tend to do that and are extremely helpful matching modules to gear.

 

My Netgear switches are comfortable with Intel purposed SFP and SFP+ modules as is the Synology file server. However when I had my Ubiquiti gear, I had to have customised SFP modules for Ubiquiti gear to accept and use them. And if I remember correctly (it's been a few years since Ubiquiti) the Ubiquiti purposed modules did not even work in the Netgear switch (M4100 at the time).