The Computer Audiophile Posted October 14, 2021 Share Posted October 14, 2021 Thread cleaned up. Thanks @bobflood for letting me know, I hadn't been following this thread. @TomJ do you think your thread is best placed in the objective section or left in this section due to your attempts to correlate sound quality with this stuff? Account Closed 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 It would also be really cool to see measurements of the fiber converters or SFPs. Sometime the cure to an ailment also has side effects. I’ve always wondered if putting an SFP slot and module inside a HiFi component also causes noise issues itself, even though the fiber has isolated anything upstream. All interesting really stuff. Jud 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 10 minutes ago, Cogito said: Holo Audio is already doing Electrical to Optical Conversion and back to Electrical in its USB input to get rid of noise (galvanic isolation). Yes, Ayre has done that for a long time. Some of the optical conversion tech used in this capacity is less than ideal. The cure can be worse than the illness. Exocer 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 7 hours ago, Cogito said: @One and a half You are misinforming the readers. Google is free, use it. Comments like this don’t help anyone. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 45 minutes ago, Cogito said: True. We all have our subjective biases and limitations to objective knowledge. We struggle with those all the time. We constantly are seeking more information, more knowledge, to enhance our experience of this hobby. Some of the time we come across good info, most of the useless info. But when someone is posting blatantly false information, it needs to be pointed out, IMO. If I post some wrong info and you point it out, I will take a step back and try to digest it and correct myself. If OTOH, I double down and make more wrong assertions, I would hope someone points it out. That’s exactly what happened here. Posting correct info is great. Telling someone to use Google isn't. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Cogito said: i get the feeling you are conflating two different technologies. I was referring to the network side of the PC based music server. Let me explain. In our homes we have copper based and wireless networks. Wireless network is not recommended for streaming as it has high levels of radio freq noise. Even in the wired network there is lot of noise present. Since the goal is to reduce the noise getting into the DAC, it needs to be eliminated before it enters the music server PC. The solution I am talking about works like this. Just before the music server convert the electrical signals to optical and pass them on to the PC. The PC will have a Optical NIC where the optical signals are converted back to electrical. The SFP are installed on either end of the short optical cable and the data is still in the IP domain where all the error detection and error correction protocols are embedded, I am not sure what parameter you would measure which are relevant to audio. If the parts are Of decent quality, there should be any issues. I am not aware of any use of SFP modules between music server and DAC. I fully understand the issue. I use a full fiber network in my house, with copper only to the endpoints that need it. Here is one that has a built-in SFP cage. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 18, 2021 11 minutes ago, Superdad said: That is not correct. 100Mbps Ethernet is 3 voltage levels and Gigabit Ethernet signaling is 5 voltage levels. For convenience I’ll quote from Wikipedia: 10BASE-T transmitter sends two differential voltages, +2.5 V or −2.5 V. A 100BASE-TX transmitter sends three differential voltages, +1 V, 0 V, or −1 V.[13] Unlike earlier Ethernet standards using broadband and coaxial cable, such as 10BASE5 (thicknet) and 10BASE2 (thinnet), 10BASE-T does not specify the exact type of wiring to be used but instead specifies certain characteristics that a cable must meet. This was done in anticipation of using 10BASE-T in existing twisted-pair wiring systems that did not conform to any specified wiring standard. Some of the specified characteristics are attenuation, characteristic impedance, timing jitter,[citation needed] propagation delay, and several types of noise and crosstalk. Cable testers are widely available to check these parameters to determine if a cable can be used with 10BASE-T. These characteristics are expected to be met by 100 meters of 24-gauge unshielded twisted-pair cable. However, with high-quality cabling, reliable cable runs of 150 meters or longer are often achievable and are considered viable by technicians familiar with the 10BASE-T specification.[citation needed] 100BASE-TX follows the same wiring patterns as 10BASE-T, but is more sensitive to wire quality and length, due to the higher bit rates. 1000BASE-T uses all four pairs bi-directionally using hybrid circuits and cancellers.[14] Data is encoded using 4D-PAM5; four dimensions using pulse-amplitude modulation (PAM) with five voltages, −2 V, −1 V, 0 V, +1 V, and +2 V.[15] While +2 V to −2 V may appear at the pins of the line driver, the voltage on the cable is nominally +1 V, +0.5 V, 0 V, −0.5 V and −1 V.[16] Thanks Alex for providing great information and not telling someone to Google it. Pigs might be stretching their wings because plissken up-voted your comment :~) Exocer, RickyV, semente and 1 other 4 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 5 minutes ago, Cogito said: My comment about googling may not have been polite, but I do find your stalking and heckling childish. I didn’t expect it from the founder of this site. Perhaps we have very different definitions of stalking and heckling. Please let me know where you believed I stalked and heckled you. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 @Cogito and @plissken you guys are no longer allowed to post in this thread because you’ve proven unable to get along with others and offer opinions or facts without being offensive. Please start your own threads if you want to discuss the topic. NanoSword 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 @plissken your sole goal here seems to be to make people uncomfortable, to use your own term. That’s antithetical to furthering people’s understanding and fostering a community of learning and enjoying this hobby. You’ve now been banned from AS pkane2001 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 18, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 18, 2021 In case anyone thinks this is censorship, I’ll enlighten them of the site rules. Anyone is free to start their own thread and say whatever they wish. They just can’t stifle all conversations by making assertions (right or wrong) and posting offensive answers. If one isn’t wanted in a conversation, it must be respected. If Plissken would’ve started his own rebuttal thread to this, after he was asked to not post, it would’ve been all good. The problem is that posting in another thread is never good enough for guys like him. There needs to be an audience and he needs to make people feel uncomfortable (his word not mine). That isn’t how communities work and it isn’t how anyone learns. It certainly makes nobody receptive of what’s being said. Back to the regularly scheduled programming. LondonDan, TomJ and Markus8 3 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 1 hour ago, TomJ said: I had also requested here in with the forum owner an article concerning the topic Ethernet sound with my measurements, on this unfortunately then no more answer received. Just to make sure people have the facts. Here is my response to your message. At the time, the article concept wasn’t very clear in my head, but I was clearly interested in the topic. I was interested in your findings, but had no clue what you’d found or how you tested anything. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 34 minutes ago, TomJ said: As I wrote in the posts of my measurement Thread: The measurements are only valid for comparisons. Not absolut regarding the values. I certainly hear you, but if the measurements aren’t 100% valid, how can a comparison be valid? Something seems off. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 22, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted October 22, 2022 Interesting results. I’ve been using a Ravenna based 12 channel system for 24/48 - 24/352.8 music. The network card for this system is incredibly important, as are the correct settings within the card config. A system can go from not working, to working pretty well, to working perfectly, based on the config. I wonder if network card config could change your results or even the content that’s sent through the card could change the results. 12 channels of DXD can be pretty demanding vs two channel 16/44.1. Here are some network card recommendations from Merging - https://merging.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/PUBLICDOC/pages/4817173/RAVENNA+ASIO+recommended+Network+Adapter I’ve been considering this card - https://daleproaudio.com/products/merging-technologies-net-msc-gbex1-gigabit-aes67-ravenna-pcie-card-for-horus-system#description Exocer and MFJG 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 22, 2022 Share Posted October 22, 2022 3 minutes ago, TomJ said: From my measurement experience the most driver settings doesn’t change much regarding Jitter and CM noise. But I only do measurements with 100Base tx. The only setting, but only available on Linux, which has an impact on CM noise is the MDI/X setting. On Linux you can set the mode to MDI for the outgoing traffic and MDIX for the incoming, So it is secured that the data will only be sent on the 1/2 pair, not on the impedance critical 3/6 pair. This impacts CM noise. I friend of mine works with 8 channel stuff and he also reports, that the settings of the driver are difficult, but I think it has more to do with throughput of the card itself than with Jitter and noise. It would be interesting to see how these devices change under loads. If the noise and jitter are effected by 12 channels of DXD vs 2 of CD quality. I think heat certain goes up on the devices with this much data, but I’m not sure if that effects the measurements you’re doing. I really don’t know, but am curious. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now