EtherREGEN: All posts about firmware moved here

[Iving]

29 minutes ago, Superdad said:

Chill guys! 

Since John and I are the only people on the planet currently able to compare the current firmware (A/B/A/B) to the original (and despite what someone implied I have not sent a "rollback" file to ANYONE), I'd say it was amusing how a FEW of you are getting hung up on what you THINK you remember the original sounding like.  Only I am not amused, as all you are doing sowing fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

The new firmware--aside from fixing the EEE bug--improves transmit and receive performance of the PHY circuits of the 'A'-side RJ45 ports. That is all. We reserve the right to produce a technically superior product.  Whoever said they thought we spent months "voicing" the EtherREGEN to its original release "sound" and then rushed in a change without listening is 100% wrong on both counts.

I think one vocal person is using only the optical port on the 'A' side and still claiming the new firmware "ruins" the sound him. But the code change we made does not touch the SFP cage's SGMII interface at all, so it is just imagination. 

 

I am going to listen again myself over the weekend and then make a decision about if we will make the technically poorer performing firmware file available. Until then, please tone it down a bit.  Thanks,

--Alex C. 

 

It's not reasonable to suggest that those of us struggling with ER rev. are sowing fear, uncertainty and doubt. That is a false and pernicious frame for our motives and I object to it.

[Jud]

12 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

disagree

ER1 and ER2 are two completely different animals

they have different personalities

they are effectively two different products

ER1 earned very near unanimous approval

ER2 is very hifi but some of us feel it is inferior musically

it is fascinating that a single-design product can produce two different outputs the result of fixing an EEE problem and/or ???

the ER clearly has truly massive potential

ER2 doesn't feel like a final solution

 

Ah, OK, I was wondering what part of my comment you disagreed with. 🙂 No problem, I retract my assumption that everyone would think not having an ER at all would be more subjectively consequential than the firmware change. And I wish you an agreeable outcome.

[JohnSwenson]

5 minutes ago, soares said:

It must be me Alex, as I am just using the fiber. 🤪

but I haven’t touch anything on the system. And whether I am having some ear troubles or it’s not my imagination... 

I am sorry Alex, but it’ what I am hearing. I will check tonight if I disconnected anything from my system.

cheers Jorge

The changes only affect the RJ45 ports on the A side, not the SFP port or the RJ45 port on the B side.

 

Could you remind me of your connectivity again? Do you have anything else on the A side? I've been racking brain trying to figure out how changes to just the A side RJ45 ports could possible affect anything on the SFP port if there is nothing attached to them. The changes only affects signals on the RJ45 ports, so if nothing is connected then I don't see how anything could possibly be changed.

 

We do know that sometimes the SFP modules make poor contacts with the connector inside the SFP cage. Could you try taking the optical cable out, pulling out the SFP module, reinsterting it, firmly pushing it in, then reconnect the optical cable and see if that makes any difference.

 

Thanks,

 

John S.

[Ehsu]

8 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

disagree

ER1 and ER2 are two completely different animals

they have different personalities

they are effectively two different products

ER1 earned very near unanimous approval

ER2 is very hifi but some of us feel it is inferior musically

it is fascinating that a single-design product can produce two different outputs the result of fixing an EEE problem and/or ???

the ER clearly has truly massive potential

ER2 doesn't feel like a final solution

 

I think most of us for or against the update all exaggerated the scale of changes. I do not think it’s “huge” difference but I feel the update sounded slightly different. Definitely hear what they improved it but I missed the engaging sound of the original which “ maybe “ imagined because it was such a big improvement over my Netgear switch at the time. But somehow I don’t connect with my music as much as with original ER. I just wish I can roll back to original to have a listen again to be certain, that’s all. 

[Iving]

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

my assumption that everyone would think not having an ER at all would be more subjectively consequential than the firmware change

 

well you were referring to "emotional charge"

that is indeed a subjective thing

for some of us the emotional "consequences" of ER1 > ER2 are painfully greater than the ER > ER1 gain

thank you for wishing agreeable outcome(s)

*that* is *my* motive - win win win

everything is ok

[dminches]

44 minutes ago, Superdad said:

transmit and receive performance of the PHY circuits

 

Alex, maybe at some time (in another thread) you or John can explain what this means.  I tried to google it but didn't find anything meaningful.

 

[Jud]

3 minutes ago, dminches said:

 

Alex, maybe at some time (in another thread) you or John can explain what this means.  I tried to google it but didn't find anything meaningful.

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHY_(chip)

 

It's the chip that implements the Ethernet protocol for the switch. The firmware update improved the chip's performance with regard to receiving and sending Ethernet data.

[dminches]

Just now, Jud said:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHY_(chip)

 

It's the chip that implements the Ethernet protocol for the switch. The firmware update improved the chip's performance with regard to receiving and sending Ethernet data.

 

Thanks for the link.  I know what the definition of PHY is.  What I would like to know is the definition of "improved the chip's performance" is.  That is a pretty general term.

 

[Jud]

2 minutes ago, dminches said:

 

Thanks for the link.  I know what the definition of PHY is.  What I would like to know is the definition of "improved the chip's performance" is.  That is a pretty general term.

 

 

The Wikipedia article says "the Ethernet PHY is a chip that implements the hardware send and receive function of Ethernet frames." Whether the firmware changes made throughput more reliable, closer to nominal speed values, or improved it in other ways, I wouldn't know.

[jandersonhill]

I really feel for Alex and John. They've worked hard (and I feel succeeded) in delivering a great product at a great price and there are so many posts about the merits of the update, I doubt they are getting to enjoy the Thanksgiving period. I do wonder whether we could give them a short break to: a) relax over the weekend; and b) give them a chance to think.

 

I'm only writing this as I think, if I were in their shoes, I'd be pretty fed up at this moment in time. Two days reflection will probably provide a better solution and less likelihood of them going off to design spaceships instead (which I have no doubt would be far easier and more profitable!).

 

[JohnSwenson]

53 minutes ago, Ehsu said:

Of course I remember the reason for the update. It was SUPPOSED to fix connection issue only! You do know they changed other codes for SQ as Alex said himself? So I do not know what is your point here? If you love you ER v2 or Tesla, thats fine. I am not asking you to change! If we have a choice, it wont affect people who love their version2. My point is this, I bought a Porsche then it turns into a Tesla or Bentley or whatever after a few weeks?  

This is not true, the changes were NOT made for SQ purposes at all.  Here is the full story on the technical side of this, do with it as you will.

 

Quite a while ago while working on the opticalRendu I noticed the switch chip (the same switch chip was being used at that time) the connection to the CPU was going up and down, many times. I could not figure out what it was. Then an errata sheet came out for the switch chip which talked about the EEE bug, I wrote the code for the workaround on the main processor and fed that to the switch chip, It worked.

 

The EtherREGEN uses the same chip as I had originally on the oR (I picked it for the ER, but used it for prototyping on the oR since I knew it well). At this point the ER did not exist in the final form, it was several different boards trying out different parts of the system. I had not seen the EEE problem at all, probably because I was not testing it with anything that supported EEE. After I finally got the functionality for the ER working and I had the whole system up and running I wrote the code to send the workaround to the switch chip, it was much more complicated because I had to do it for 4 ports instead of one, it was also written for a completely different processor and environment. Somewhere along the line I made a mistake in that code that didn't actually implement the workaround, but I didn't know that at the time. Since I couldn't make the EEE problem happen, (it only happens for some boards and some equipment), I didn't know it wasn't working. Neither my testing, nor Alex's or the beta testers have the problem.

 

The problem only showed up when the ER went out into the field with enough different configurations that some people started having the problem. Remember that at this point I thought I had the workaround for the EEE stuff in every ER out there. It took some time and a lot of looking at the code to realize there was a bug in the code. While in the process I found a new errata sheet for the switch chip that added some new problems for the chip and workarounds for them.

 

At this point I fixed the EEE workaround code and found out that that it actually CAUSED dropouts every time an RJ45 A port connected. The connection would go up, then down, then back up. I could not figure this out, it didn't make any sense. I then tried adding the workarounds for the other two errata issues, both of which were supposedly only for rare "corner cases" which should only occur for long cables. One was for transmit, it increased the transmit amplitude very slightly, and the other was for receive which increased the probability of receiving very weak signals. Viola! The up down up behavior went away. I listened to it for quite some time with no problems, but did notice a small improvement in SQ, I still have no idea why.

 

Well that is it. This was all done in an attempt to improve connectivity issues. The sound change was not something that was intended, it was not something that was "tuned" it just showed up as a result of adding the workarounds for problems that already existed in the chip. I still have no idea how these changes could be affecting SQ.

 

John S.

[Jud]

27 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

At this point I fixed the EEE workaround code and found out that that it actually CAUSED dropouts every time an RJ45 A port connected.

 

If I'm understanding this, "just fixing EEE without touching anything else" is not an option.

[JohnSwenson]

6 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

If I'm understanding this, "just fixing EEE without touching anything else" is not an option.

Correct, there is no way I'm sending out anything that causes a connection to go up then down then up, ALL the TIME for everything I tested it on.

 

John S.

[Jud]

By the way, I'm jealous of all of you getting to listen to a v1 or v2 ER tonight. All day power outage here!

[Ehsu]

34 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

I listened to it for quite some time with no problems, but did notice a small improvement in SQ, I still have no idea why.

Hi John, thanks so much for clarifying the details and backgrounds of this update. I think SQ improvements are very subjective. May I ask what kind of sound you prefer? The reason for asking is that you may think smoothness is an improvement but I may not because I like get up and go kind of sound for example. Some people may prefer a brighter sound but I prefer a darker sound so any change towards the top end can end up with totally different conclusion due to different preferences. 

I think some of us having different opinions of the change is not strange at all and we have no idea why we hear changes, just like you I guess. Since SQ change was totally unintended, I wonder why we get criticised for having different opinions on the outcome? 

We are just giving you guys our feedbacks and I dont think anyone has some kind of secret agenda here.

[rickca]

Things like this are not unusual in product development.  I think engineers encounter similar things on most projects.  The difference is that John and Alex are so transparent about their R&D process.  And that's something I value a great deal.

[Indydan]

3 hours ago, Bernstein said:

There are several opinions on V1 and V2. 
Can the people happy with the V2 give some statements about their observations?

 

V2 sounds as good as V1 in my system. Maybe users are going through the burn in period. When a device burns in it and can vary in sound quality.  Relax, listen and wait before jumping to conclusions. 

 

 

[Puma Cat]

3 hours ago, Bernstein said:

There are several opinions on V1 and V2. 
Can the people happy with the V2 give some statements about their observations?

 

Sure, I found that going from V1 to V2 was like using a good "Unsharp Mask" on a digital photo in Photoshop. More detail, a more natural "rendering" of the "subject" but not "overdone", either. 

[soares]

2 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

The changes only affect the RJ45 ports on the A side, not the SFP port or the RJ45 port on the B side.

 

Could you remind me of your connectivity again? Do you have anything else on the A side? I've been racking brain trying to figure out how changes to just the A side RJ45 ports could possible affect anything on the SFP port if there is nothing attached to them. The changes only affects signals on the RJ45 ports, so if nothing is connected then I don't see how anything could possibly be changed.

 

We do know that sometimes the SFP modules make poor contacts with the connector inside the SFP cage. Could you try taking the optical cable out, pulling out the SFP module, reinsterting it, firmly pushing it in, then reconnect the optical cable and see if that makes any difference.

 

Thanks,

 

John S.

Dear John, thank you for taking your time to reply to my messages. My optimal configuration after many trials was to have my zen mkIII connected directly to the router and also connected over Ethernet to an oM and from it to the eR with fiber. From eR it was connected by Ethernet (b side) to an uR and then usb to an iR connected to my oppo 205 usb input (I had previously a Qutest but preferred the oppo as a Dac). Gianmaria Testa singing “una carezza d’amor” is a good track to evaluate SQ (I know it quite well).  As soon I received the eR I was struck by the impact of Gianmaria voice. Deep and profound. I heard it just before the upgrade. I did the upgrade and everything changed. Not just with this song but many others. I will check tonight all connections and report back but this is not coming from my imagination. I am 54 and This is my hobby for almost 30 years. I don’t doubt that you didn’t touch to the fiber port but something happened.  go figure... This being said I wish you both a excellent and well deserved weekend. I’ll be waiting  for your decision on the former firmware. Thank you. Jorge

[JohnSwenson]

44 minutes ago, rickca said:

Things like this are not unusual in product development.  I think engineers encounter similar things on most projects.  The difference is that John and Alex are so transparent about their R&D process.  And that's something I value a great deal.

The switch chip we are using is an interesting take on this process. The chip was originally designed by one semiconductor company, that was bought by another, then THAT company was bought by yet another semiconductor company. The original designers are long gone. The current company was getting all kinds of complaints about these chips (there is a whole line of them) and THEIR engineers had no idea what was inside. So a couple years ago they gave one of their most experienced engineers the task of finding out what was inside, how it worked and what could be done about the complaints from their customers (engineers putting these chips on boards).

 

The head of the team grabbed several experienced engineers and they spent many months pouring over the files for these chips, learning what was inside and how they worked. They also tested them exhaustively to find out how they really behaved. They found a number of problems and then went the extra mile and figured out ways to program the chip to workaround the problems in the silicon. 

 

I've actually done similar things myself and I'll tell you it is not an easy task. I have a tremendous amount of admiration for the team that did this, and the management that determined it was necessary and stuck with the process.

 

BTW these chips are worth it. There are only a couple chips with similar functionality on the market and they cost at least 6 times as much!

 

John S.

[andresz]

I think the easiest way to sort this is to simply make a roll back file available and for those of us who hear and see the differences and prefer V1 to be able to revert to that. In fact I have an email to that effect which is the only reason I took the chance to try V2. So please someone please make this file available and everyone happy. (its possibly like DAC filters where some prefer one style to another re presentation) The purpose of this forum is not be like ASR where there is denial of change but an acceptance that there are things which make differences we cant quite pinpoint. That is why we are here and not there. There is something going on re the versions that is audible and visual. Its really interesting for further research.  

 

By the way, I own most of Alex and Johns products and strongly actively advocate my great experiences dealing with both. The fact that there is a forum like this that accepts "listener impressions" is what adds to the integrity of Uptone. We as audiophiles really care about our hobby and interacting so that we share experiences.  

 

Also, I had no problems with connectivity with V1. Ran really fast and tight. Perfect. 

 

[kennyb123]

My system has never sounded better.  I’m still blown away by how much the ER has benefited sound quality here - maybe even more so after the V2 upgrade.  I say “maybe” as I can only base this on my recollection of the sound with the V1 firmware - and as I’ve only had the ER for 20 days, I am reluctant to state emphatically that there was a further improvement with V2 - even though I think there was.  Most certainly the sound didn’t get worse.  Sorry to be blunt, but I’m having a really hard time believing the claims - made with absolutely certainty - that the sound got worse.  If you can’t make the same emotional connection, might it have more to do with you over-analyzing things?  

[andresz]

It isn't technical analysis. It is very obvious in toe tapping and emotional attachment for me. And a no brainer if you stream home theater. It is really easy to see. I test a lot of gear with high end products and very familiar with responding to musical info such as treble edge of instruments, the placement of bass in 3 D space etc... this is really obvious when you are both watching and listening to a live performance. I only test live minimum miked music, vocals etc...   The rig has Tidal Audio Contriva Diacera with black diamond speakers so resolution is really transparent.   As I said, I dont deny any ones experience I am telling you mine. I spend months evaluating power cables, isolation, etc.... and this difference isnt where you have to A B over and over to try and find results. It is obvious. I also have a high end valve pre and power so the system is already very organic. More "smoothness" if that is what some describe hearing - on a resolving system comes across as veiled and a blend of musical info that loses its sense of space as individual entities interacting.

 

You either feel it or you don't. The analysis only comes after the why are we not feeling it and then what may be a cause of it.  The best way to evaluate anything is how it makes you engaged - and by the way, have a test on Video if you really want another platform of how ethernet reacts. 

 

We would all rather not waste our time on this - but this is a listener impressions forum and hopefully everyone working together to understand what is going on. But the ER is a ground breaking product and all on this forum will fight the ASR brigade to the death re their "its your imagination" claims re Ethernet not making a difference. My answer is YES, Ethernet makes a hell of a difference but so does the firmware. 

 

I am hoping that this feedback is in the spirit of exploration and "wow, what does this mean" rather than an attack on product integrity or the science. I am thinking that we are all above that paradigm. ER is an outstanding piece of engineering and a game changer on Ethernet - I think we are now discussing another level of nuance.  It is very interesting.

 

 

[Jud]

31 minutes ago, andresz said:

As I said, I dont deny any ones experience I am telling you mine.

 

Agreed. Forgive those of us who are enjoying the ER with upgraded firmware and perhaps as much out of curiosity as anything else, say "But are you doing this, and have you tried that?" 🙂

 

I personally have no problem with anyone questioning the reliability of my subjective impressions, and I make no particular claim as to their validity. While having a great deal of scientific and engineering curiosity about how this all might work, I simply enjoy my music. But certainly in the matter of things as varied and personal as audio systems, I am quite reluctant to question anyone else's taste and experiences.

[Vule]

Re SQ and FW  I hope that some kind of compromise will be found (and implemented) prior dispatch of my unit sometime during the month of January 2020.