Jump to content

Peter Avgeris

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Peter Avgeris

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hello! Yes, I forgot to let you know. Along with the Buffalos I had listened to the Ubiquiti router(s) as a plain switch(es). Nenon had written the day before. He had listened to this thing. Buffalo switches are a totally different story. They play miles better than Ubiquitis. It seems that Ubiquiti is the best choice for routers and Buffalo the best for switches. Imaging was far bigger with Buffalos, low & high frequencies were shockingly real. Ubiquiti was sounding a lot more harsh against Buffalos. I have observed that the comments of Nenon are always in line with my own findings. He has gone through the path previously than me, so he already knows. It is a real pity that Buffalos are discontinued and not available any more. Go and get as many as you can, although I guess that the last pieces have already been completely vanished from the market. Either 8- or 16- or 24- ports, go grab them at any price. In quad version they offer a stratospheric sound quality. Last choice could be the commercial version of Melco although at a much increased price.
  2. Yes! BS-GS2008, 16 & 24 all make use of the same chips inside. I have checked the specs on Broadcom site, only difference is support for 8,16 & 24 ports respectively. All have same sound quality, character and flavor. Checked 2008 vs original Melco. In earlier posts, the 16 port has been evaluated against Melco. Melco has some shortcomings and advantages against Buffalos. Melcos are powered externally so you can directly connect LPS without extra mods. The shortcoming is that I have been told (do not know if it is 100% true) that you cannot disable the unused ports which according to my listenings and some comments on this thread, does make a positive difference. 2008 accepts directly LPS without extra mods while 2016 & 2024 do require mods to be powered externally with LPS. Regarding SQ wise, I do not expect any serious differences to occur. For absolute best sonics you should go for the 2008 version with external LPS because it is the most cost effective and most minimal. Now, if you have soldering skills, you are maniac for best sound and can manipulate the p/s section inside 2016 or 2024, you should go for them because you have more space inside for mods and clocks replacement. This is not convenient to be done inside 2008 and increased space will make your life easier. You should know that 2 pairs (4 units) of any of 2008, 2016 or 2024, stacked one upon the other will lift your sound quality to stratospheric levels. You should avoid using 1 or 3 units. The quad lifts the SQ to uncharted territories, all have been evaluated in 2 systems with both SMPS & professionally built LPS. Results were noted straightforward without the slightest hesitation in less than 5 seconds of critical listening. All serial switches need to be connected on the same ports. Pay attention : Switch #1: input port 2, output port 1 Switch #2: input port 1, output port 2 Switch #3: input port 2, output port 1 Switch #4: input port 1, output port 2 5 switches were worse than 4, while 6 did not have any positive impact at all. Hope my comment helps a bit.
  3. I owe you a response so I am back for my listening impressions. A local friend here in Athens has purchased a pair of Melco S100 switches some time ago. He runs them in series using linear power supplies for both machines. I cannot remember the brand name of these power supplies. They are a commercial product and not a DIY component. I brought together one pair of the discontinued Buffalo BS-GS2008 in order to evaluate them against the reference Melco pair. The Melcos were untouched, as they come from the manufacturer, with external linear power supplies, one per unit. My Buffalos were also untouched inside. The evaluation was performed by replacing one machine upon the other, going back and forth for several times using the same linear power supplies. My Buffalos had gone some kind of adjustments, more specifically only two ports were active, all others were suspended. Also power saving and some other parameters were adjusted exactly as it has been presented in this thread. The final listening impressions were as follows: Initially it was very hard to tell any difference. The character (or maybe lack of) was the same. Identical. Flavor of sound reproduction was the same. No need to focus more on this, same means absolutely same. After some turns of going back & forth, to my ears, I was starting to distinguish a small difference between two models, something that is quite logical IMHO. More specifically, the adjustments presented here in this thread were starting to make the difference in favor of the 8-port switch. Less ports open and some fine tunes showed their teeth but the difference was sub-minimal. To my ears the smaller models played just a tick better, in the way that 'less is usually more'. Same character, same flavor but everything was just a tick higher. Transparency, dynamics, spatial information, treble energy, all were just slightly higher. As a conclusion, the Buffalo BS-GS2008, carrying the same chip inside as the bigger BS-GS2016 and the Melco S100, has the same character and flavor with their bigger brothers and it is a real bargain for those who were able to source this fantastic network component. For those who haven't sourced their Buffalo(s) yet, go and get everything you can find around, 8, 16 or 24 port, regardless the asking price, in whatever condition, used or new. It is certain that they will play music like no other switch, second only to the famous M12 Gold Switch.
  4. Hehe, I might really need a treat! 🙂 LPS does make a difference, this is well known since prehistoric era. But I believe that if something is good, it should be good even with SMPS. I did that out of curiosity. I am not that crazy with all this digital gear, not in a way that it does not contribute to the end result but in a way that their contribution is sub-subminimal compared to the one of the amplifier and of course the loudspeaker. I am 80% amp & speakers guy, network stuff is not my field but I really enjoy making some mods here. What I have been told by one of the biggest net gurus here is the fact that switches for audio purposes must be used in pairs and on the same port for solving issues related to noise rejection. Trying other switches proved that he is right but the degree of rejection does not seem to be identical.
  5. So you think that 2008 is easier to source? I don't think so. It is out of production and can't be found anywhere. Some last pieces are available on eBay and that's all! With the same power supply, I can't find any logical reason for the 2016 to play better than 2008. The hardware inside is the same with only difference being the ability to drive 16 ports. In my case all ports are off besides the two in use. Tomorrow is the big day. 2008 vs ubiquity er x sfp!
  6. Hello Alan. Thanks for your message. I am in the process of treating my network so I am open in evaluating everything. I got the 2008 model which does not seem to be any different than 2016, regarding SQ. P/S is out of comparison of course. I got 2 units. Difference was quite good. I was not thrilled or shocked because I was prepared. Then I switched off ports 3-8 so I'm using only ports 1&2. I got LLDP, 802.3az & ADP all off. This was a nice uptick in SQ. Today I received another two units, treated them the same way and stacked them on the already connected pair. This time I was really shocked. The difference was much bigger than what the 1st pair induced. I could not believe that it would require 4 units to suspend noise from the network. The network was already disconnected from the internet and this came as a real shock. It is probably the most shocking experience of the last month. Later I tried to mount one Ubiquiti ER X SFP vs 1x 2008 and the results are equally interesting. Tomorrow I will evaluate 2x Ubiquiti as switches vs 2x 2008. My first impression is that the Ubiquiti switch is very close (if not equal to) 2008. Going back and forth 3 times gave the same results and I could hardly tell any difference.
  7. This has been my latest experiment. I can hardly remember any better/more crazy upgrade in my digital chain... It has been a shock. 4-storey building has nothing in common to 2-storey building!
  8. Hello Alan. Things are not as you think they are. I was one of the first so bought lifetime license. OK, if not the first chronologically, at least I bought it when the software was not matured. I had bought an Antipodes flagship streamer and was using the Logitech Media Server. LMS was quite good but Roon was playing far better. Several years afterwards, on the same machine, SQ was deteriorating update after update. When I tried Roon vs LMS again, it was way worse than LMS. And this was not done this 2020 year but last year. When Taiko users were thrilled with this product, it was already inferior, you can think of further deterioration during 2020. I purchased it to support them to make it even better. I got it for 499 usd. They did not keep their promise and instead of making it better they ruined the program. Lifetime license does not mean lifetime binding. If you decide to make it worse and you neglect those first that supported you, you pay the price. I got it because it was the best, I abandoned it because it is the worse. Anybody in my position would do the same. It is not illegal, it is not unethical. The term "used software" does not apply, it is a license binded to the credentials of the user. These can be changed anytime. I can't see any bad or illegal act here. Just my two cents...
  9. You can read my post earlier regarding Roon. I had purchased the lifetime license around 4 years ago. It was the best software around, both in aesthetics & sound quality. Reality is unfortunately very far away from what you are thinking of... Roon now provides mediocre performance. It is worse than almost all software around. I sold my lifetime license around one month ago for the price I paid. The buyer and I, are both happy. I tried it against everything, it is worse than everything I tried. Hope this tells something to you. Being a pro in the field, I need to reassure you that Taiko server cost does not lie in the flat section of the ratio as you claim. It is dedicated to these people that want the very best of the best. Nothing compares to it. When you are seeking for the very best that is nowadays possible, this is it. By far. Something that is widely regarded as the 'creme de la creme' cannot be put anywhere on the cost/performance curve. It is totally outside from this curve. Just my two cents...
  10. Thanks a lot for your comment. Yes, I will try my best for the LPS. You can't go wrong spending 4 times the cost of a computer for its power supplies but you surely go right spending considerably more. The computer costs nothing, unfortunately the p/s unit costs dramatically higher. It's exactly like building a transistor amplifier, no difference at all. I planned to do this at the final step because I wanted to have first some good results. So far my best upgrade was the switch to Euphony/Stylus in terms of software. In terms of hardware my best upgrade was the network upgrade with double switches, routers and ethernet cables. Did you manage to get into your hands the Apacer RDIMM chips? I haven't been able to power up the Asus motherboard with the double 4210 cpus. We need to finish this project as well...
  11. No, I don't have only some catching up to do. I think that I have quite a lot to do. The linear supply is going to be the final step. I am sure that you have gained too much from this step. I need to go to crazy levels of performance of LPS and for this purpose I have left it for the finish line.
  12. Hi Michael. Thank you for your message. I do not think that low power cpus are necessarily better than low power ones. I have observed that higher clock speeds lead to increased dynamics & liveliness. But I cannot link the power to this benefit. Power is the product of voltage by current. Voltage is the same. There cannot be any proof at all that high current leads to better sound. On the contrary lower current *has* many advantages against high power but again this does not necessarily mean better SQ. I hope that you will agree on this. What I have observed without hesitation and exception so far is that splitting processes in more than one core, hyperthreading and turbo boost lead to worse sound. I am now using a high power Xeon CPU, originally quad core running with 2 cores at the highest speed that can climb to. It is 3.6GHz. It is a 135W TDP cpu but does not draw any considerable amount of power. I am not running HQPlayer but only Euphony/Stylus. I plan to build my linear power supplies during the next 2 months with absolutely crazy characteristics. It is then that I will have the final results. The Seasonic PSUs that I am using sound very good but of course not up to the level of the best linear supplies. But again, I can't link higher current to higher SQ. The headroom is what really matters and the ability of the power supply to provide the required current. I hope you will agree on this...
  13. OK, these are not configurations, they are upgrades / modifications of the original machines. They surely play a major role. Do you apply any specialized settings through the interface?
  14. Hello again! How's it possible to be informed of these configurations? I'd be gald if I had any information available. Thanks in advance.
  15. Hello Michael. I am using 2x Seasonic Platinum fanless rated at 400 Watts. I have not moved to Linear supplies yet, I plan to do so after I finish up everything.
  • Create New...