Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, One and a half said:

The DX cable is short and if the incoming cable is unshielded,  then the shield doesn't continue through to the source.  So the effect of a ground loop is not evident.  

 

The best way to use shielded cable with shield connected at both ends is to run another drain cable in parallel to the STP to keep the same potential at either end since shield impedance is higher than the drain wire. This causes the ground loop in the first place.

 

Shielding cables at one end is great for high voltages like 3000V , but ethernet...acts like an antenna.

 

Router -> DX  cable + DX -> Unshielded generic Cat6 -> DX + DX cable -> ER side A

So the generic Cat6 is the setup above "breaks" the shield and prevents ground loops.

 

Does it make sense to assemble 2 short unshielded generic Cat6 to replace the DX cables?

 

 

Stereo

[Genelec 1032C x 2 + 7360 x 2] <== [MC3+USB x 3 <-- REF10 SE120] <== [AERIS G2] <== [EtherRegen x 3]
Chain switchable to [Genelec 8331 x 2 + 7350]


Surround

[Genelec 1032C x 3 + 8431 x 2  + 7360 x 2] <== [MiniDSP U-DIO8] <== [Mac Mini] 

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, LowMidHigh said:

Does it make sense to assemble 2 short unshielded generic Cat6 to replace the DX cables?


I don’t think so the short DX cables are shielded and connected to both sides.  By the DX module the shieldings are not connected.

so the short shielded DX cables could give a positive result. (the shield is then only on one side connected.)

Link to comment


By the AfterDark. Constellation Network Cable Special Edition for EtherREGEN, are only 4 of the 8 wires connected and gives a better result with the EtherRegen.
 

I myself found this out when I connected the outgoing ethernet cable from my modem to the router through the RJ / E ports of an audioquest powerquest 3. (which I connected only to Modem and Router)

 

I didn't do this for SQ, but for any lightning strikes.

 

To my surprise, the SQ improved significantly.

 

When I got faster internet, 350 mbbs, it turned out that I couldn't get more than 95 to 100 mbbs from the router.
After a lot of searching and measuring, this turned out to be due to the RJ45 ports of the powerquest3. 
It turned out that only 4 wires were connected there instead of all 8. So you will not get a higher speed than 100mbbs from the router, but better SQ from the EtherRegen.
 

In the end, I also reduced my internet speed from the provider to 75 mbbs, which is more than enough for all my streaming

Link to comment

Does anyone know how or if these DX Filters are different from the Baaske Medical Ethernet isolators? They also use the same Halo RJ45 plugs for the in and out. They seem very similar to me, but for all I know they could be doing something completely different and just physically look similar? 
I’ll have to go back a hundred responses or so to see what @JohnSwensongave for the explanation of what the medical Ethernet isolators do? 
I have a few of these Baaske isolators now just collecting dust since it seemed like John Swenson thought it wasn’t likely to do to much upstream the A side of the EtherRegen and I wanted to eliminate all the additional Ethernet cables and connections using them added. 
I was only using one in the middle of each connection as follows:

router -> Baaske-> eR , so maybe I should experiment using two of them like how the DX filters are being used and see if that gives me any benefit on the A side prior to buying and trying the DX filters if they’re essentially doing the same thing ? 

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, agladstone said:

Does anyone know how or if these DX Filters are different from the Baaske Medical Ethernet isolators? They also use the same Halo RJ45 plugs for the in and out. They seem very similar to me, but for all I know they could be doing something completely different and just physically look similar? 
I’ll have to go back a hundred responses or so to see what @JohnSwensongave for the explanation of what the medical Ethernet isolators do? 
I have a few of these Baaske isolators now just collecting dust since it seemed like John Swenson thought it wasn’t likely to do to much upstream the A side of the EtherRegen and I wanted to eliminate all the additional Ethernet cables and connections using them added. 
I was only using one in the middle of each connection as follows:

router -> Baaske-> eR , so maybe I should experiment using two of them like how the DX filters are being used and see if that gives me any benefit on the A side prior to buying and trying the DX filters if they’re essentially doing the same thing ? 

 

My thinking is the DX, Baaske and Emo isolators all share the same principles. The only real difference I can see is the the recommended use in pairs. I have a Emo EN-70HD between my Mac mini and the EtherREGEN A-side and this certainly makes quite a positive difference. I guess the etherREGEN benefits from the rejected noise by this isolator. It does more in my system than the DX-pair between ISP router and opticalModule I have upstream the etherREGEN since a few hours.

 

To my memory, the statements JS made were related to the use of isolators on the B-side.

Streamer dCS Network Bridge DAC Chord DAVE Amplifier / DRC Lyngdorf TDAI-3400 Speakers Lindemann BL-10 | JL audio E-sub e110 Head-fi and reference Bakoon HPA-21 | Audeze LCD-3 (f) Power and isolation Dedicated power line | Xentek extreme isolation transformer (1KVA, balanced) | Uptone Audio EtherREGEN + Ferrum Hypsos | Sonore OpticalModule + Uptone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2 | Jensen CI-1RR Cables Jorma Digital XLR (digital), Grimm Audio SQM RCA (analog), Kimber 8TC + WBT (speakers), custom star-quad with Oyaide connectors (AC), Ferrum (DC) and Ghent (ethernet) Software dCS Mosaic | Tidal | Qobuz

Link to comment
On 5/1/2021 at 12:32 PM, JohnSwenson said:

I have looked at a Baaske, it is a transformer with a bandwidth just high enough to pass 100M or 1G signals. Note the actual symbol rate of 100M and 1G is exactly the same.

 

All standard Ethernet interfaces already contain a transformer, so are ALREADY galvanically isolated. The difference is that the Baaske transformer is specifically rated for some very high voltage (I don't remember the actual number but it is probably something like 5000 volts). The standard transformers are not tested to meet a specific high voltage.

 

The frequency roll off just above what is necessary to pass the signal can help cut down on very high frequency noise that might get picked up on a cable, BUT it also degrades the signal because it chops off the harmonics necessary to produce nice square waves.

 

Both standard transformers and the Baaske behave exactly the same in regards to leakage current: blocking low impedance and passing high impedance.

 

The whole "medical" part is just that for the Baaske every one is tested to make sure it can withstand the high voltage specs. The standards ones are not individually tested. The Baaske transformer is physically larger in order to have the thicker insulation necessary to meet the high voltage test, but this cuts down on the bandwidth. The standard transformers almost all have higher bandwidth.

 

The "medical" part is there to protect humans connected to diagnostic equipment that are connected to Ethernet, so that if something bizarre happens and the cable gets some very high voltage applied to it it won't make it to the electrodes connected to a patient. Standard Ethernet transformers generally do not have to meet this requirement.

 

So what happens inside the ER in this regard? The ER has very expensive Ethernet transformers, they are NOT medical rated (very few audiophiles run the output of an ER into electrodes connected directly to their bodies) but they are very high bandwidth designed to preserve the signal integrity of signals passing through them. They also have very good common mode rejection.

 

Something like the Baaske MAY have an advantage in some cases where the lower bandwidth helps to reduce some noise on the signals, but you have to trade that off with what happens because of the degraded signal integrity. In some cases it may make a small improvement, in others it will make no difference and in others it may degrade things a little.

 

On the B side of the ER the signal coming out is already extremely clean  so the only thing a Baaske does is degrade the signal, thus the recommendation to never use it on the B side side. (This is assuming the B side is connected to the  audio equipment).

 

I have only looked at the Baaske not any of the others, some may be similar, some may be different, I don't know.

 

John S.

 

Correct, not on the B side.

Grimm Audio MU1 > Mola Mola Tambaqui > Mola Mola Kaluga > B&W 803 D3    

Cables:  Kubala-Sosna    Power management:  Shunyata    Room:  Vicoustics  

 

“Nature is pleased with simplicity.”  Isaac Newton

"As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man...they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed."  Charles Darwin - The Descent of Man

Link to comment

I have carefully compared my BJC (non-shielded) one foot cables at the end of the DX to the cable that came with the DX (shielded) after one week of burn-in.

 

They sound VERY different but I cannot conclusively say one is better than the other.

 

The BJC is tonally noticeably darker, more focused.  The DX cable is noticeably brighter, airier sounding.

 

I see this as personal preference.  Detail and transparency seem close to equal.... 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, André Gosselin said:

What if the ER is connected the reverse way, eg: B > A and the DX connected just before the B jack ?

I think that would work fine, but only an experiment in your own system can help you determine that.  The idea is to have the DX before the eR does its thing, not after.  

Grimm Audio MU1 > Mola Mola Tambaqui > Mola Mola Kaluga > B&W 803 D3    

Cables:  Kubala-Sosna    Power management:  Shunyata    Room:  Vicoustics  

 

“Nature is pleased with simplicity.”  Isaac Newton

"As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man...they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed."  Charles Darwin - The Descent of Man

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Rsbrsvp said:

Based on my several day experiment of switching the end-cables of the DX between shielded and non-shielded I am forced to conclude that the cables upstream of side A DO make a noticeable difference in sound.

In my setup, differences among non-shield-tied cables were insignificant.  Perhaps this is system dependent, as most things are, or the result of shielded vs non-shielded.  Or did you try more than one of each kind?  

Grimm Audio MU1 > Mola Mola Tambaqui > Mola Mola Kaluga > B&W 803 D3    

Cables:  Kubala-Sosna    Power management:  Shunyata    Room:  Vicoustics  

 

“Nature is pleased with simplicity.”  Isaac Newton

"As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man...they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed."  Charles Darwin - The Descent of Man

Link to comment

Thanks to everyone so far that has helped me (hopefully others too!) understand the differences between what the Medical Ethernet isolators do vs. the DX “filters”.

Seems like the DX units may be more beneficial than the Medical Ethernet isolators, it also seems possible that a combination/ chain of the Medical Ethernet isolator out of router than going in and out of a pair of DX filters upstream of the A side of EtherRegen may even provide more of a benefit (or make it worse, obviously this would need to be A / B tested). 
The other scenario I’m now contemplating is what if instead of trying all the isolators and filters and the 3 additional Ethernet cables it would require, I was to use an Audiophile Ethernet cable on the A side and the B side of the ER? Seems like people are discovering the cable on the A side does actually make a difference ( the Audio Bacon guy actually makes this claim in one of his Audiophile Switch reviews, I can’t remember which one). 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, One and a half said:

I had a look at the Emo unit which has a high voltage isolation component, and uses the isolation properties to block noise, whereas the dx filter is based on noise filtration only. Not possible to see the data sheet on the Emo, some weblink faff, would suggest the DX units after the EMO and in front of the EtherRegen Port A, since you then have safety/isolation plus filtration. By accounts from others the DX units are effective just before the EtherRegen. 

 

If there is not much change in the SQ with the DX in this position it means the EMO is doing its job. Isolation transformers (like in the EMO) can still allow some noise to pass, so I think there will be a benefit. 

 

Yes, the B side should be clear to the Renderer/DAC/Endpoint, suspect there is a feedback mechanism which may be compromised when a filter or isolater are used. Just a guess there.

 

Find attached the datasheet of the Emo EN-70 series.

 

I thought the most logical place for the DX's is where I put them now. Please note that my (Uptone DC modded) Mac mini is only serving as a Roon server. I can easily determine it's (negative) effect in electrical terms by temporarily switching it off and comparing the sound quality with the very good player software of the dCS Network Bridge (Mosaic), which also supports Qobuz. The Emo EN-70HD brings Mac mini/Roon on par with Mosaic.

 

So if I omit the mac mini my current chain is:

 

ISP router > DX > short Telegartner CAT6 UTP > DX > OpticalModule (fed by LPS-1.2) > 10m fiber with Finisar SFP's > EtherREGEN (fed by JS-2) > Ghent Belden CAT6A (JSSG360) > dCS Network Bridge > ..

 

(DX's for the time being connected with with the supplied short cables, ISP router with factory SMPS and with 2 other (noisy) ethernet devices connected; a Synolgy NAS and a Orbi mesh system)

 

 

Datasheet_EN-70-V40-1591535.pdf

Streamer dCS Network Bridge DAC Chord DAVE Amplifier / DRC Lyngdorf TDAI-3400 Speakers Lindemann BL-10 | JL audio E-sub e110 Head-fi and reference Bakoon HPA-21 | Audeze LCD-3 (f) Power and isolation Dedicated power line | Xentek extreme isolation transformer (1KVA, balanced) | Uptone Audio EtherREGEN + Ferrum Hypsos | Sonore OpticalModule + Uptone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2 | Jensen CI-1RR Cables Jorma Digital XLR (digital), Grimm Audio SQM RCA (analog), Kimber 8TC + WBT (speakers), custom star-quad with Oyaide connectors (AC), Ferrum (DC) and Ghent (ethernet) Software dCS Mosaic | Tidal | Qobuz

Link to comment
18 hours ago, skatbelt said:

I just installed dual DX's between ISP router and opticalModule. Certainly not night and day in my system. Slightly cleaner / a lower noise floor is my first perception. But also a tad leaner. I am not yet sure whether it benefits musicality. My system was already very transparent and neutral. Let's see how things evolve, giving it some more time.

 

A very honest appraisal.  I have moved to using two DX units between router and ER.  There is some cleaning up of midrange smoothness and even more fluidity in delivery.  I can't detect any loss of dynamics so I don't think there is a downside.

 

As with you, it's an incremental improvement and certainly not night and day.  Other parts of the system should get attention first, this is just icing on the cake.

TP-Link MR6400 4G router > Uptone EtherREGEN reclocker > Sonore Signature Rendu SE streamer > Gustard U18 DDC > Gustard X26 Pro DAC > Belles SA-100 power amp > Usher Dancer Be-20 speakers. AfterDark clocks x 2. PS Audio P3 & P10 regenerators.

https://theaudiostandard.net

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, MartinT said:

 

A very honest appraisal.  I have moved to using two DX units between router and ER.  There is some cleaning up of midrange smoothness and even more fluidity in delivery.  I can't detect any loss of dynamics so I don't think there is a downside.

 

As with you, it's an incremental improvement and certainly not night and day.  Other parts of the system should get attention first, this is just icing on the cake.

I must have more noise in my ethernet network as for me the DX improvement was appreciable.  Perhaps not "night and day", but appreciable.

 

I guess it is better to not need the DX than to have noise which needs to be filtered out...

 

Regarding the observation of "leaner sound", I totally agree.  Increased transparency and less noise has always come together with leaner sound regardless of which component did the job.  

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Rsbrsvp said:

I have carefully compared my BJC (non-shielded) one foot cables at the end of the DX to the cable that came with the DX (shielded) after one week of burn-in.

 

They sound VERY different but I cannot conclusively say one is better than the other.

 

The BJC is tonally noticeably darker, more focused.  The DX cable is noticeably brighter, airier sounding.

 

I see this as personal preference.  Detail and transparency seem close to equal.... 

OK, you convinced me to experiment with cables.  I replaced the DX cable that has a metal connector with a generic cable that has a plastic connector and there was an improvement.  My in-wall cable, as well as the patch cable to the DX, DX to opticalModule and between the two eRs all have plastic connectors.  Perhaps the brand of cable would matter too, but I doubt I'll try that.  BJC from the wall to eR, when that was my configuration, didn't sound good to me.  

Grimm Audio MU1 > Mola Mola Tambaqui > Mola Mola Kaluga > B&W 803 D3    

Cables:  Kubala-Sosna    Power management:  Shunyata    Room:  Vicoustics  

 

“Nature is pleased with simplicity.”  Isaac Newton

"As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man...they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed."  Charles Darwin - The Descent of Man

Link to comment

I like non shielded all the way through on side A, but again, it could be a matter of taste and not technically better or worse.

 

For my side "B"of the ER I just tried a Ghentaudio RJ45 (belkin) at $79.00.  It noticeably bettered my Sablon and BJC on the "B" side.  I was shocked.  It is CLEARLY the best RJ45 I have ever heard (not that I have heard to many).

 

 

Link to comment

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...