advertisement


Does connecting a streamer to Ethernet make much difference compared to wifi?

booja30 said:
I’m sorry but how am I supposed to take anything seriously if I can carry it in without help and it doesn’t need multiple external power supplies and external clocks with their own external power supplies. Oh, and it doesn’t need to be on a massive, expensive isolation platform to work properly? Shirley you can’t be serious.
Click to expand...
who said it didn't have all those things. It's performance was significantly enhanced by the addition of 20lbs of lead to the chassis and a power cables thicker than the underwater Internet backbone...
 
x21 said:
The router is already galvanically isolated inside with transformers.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately galvanic isolation was only created to isolate from dc voltages and currents. Essentially to prevent those dc voltages and currents from frying circuit boards when the network cables were run over long distances and the relevant ground potential and dc currents between devices could be significant.

Transformers are great for isolating from dc voltages but with varying efficiencies relating to frequency they pass through ac (they have to otherwise the signal could not get through). Noise is just another ac signal as far as the transformer is concerned.

TheFlash said:
Yes, the router is. But the router is not the streamer and there are (usually) wires between them.
Click to expand...

Indeed and the streamers usually (always?) have transformer galvanic isolation on their network inputs but the same proviso applies and so noise can flow through the router to the streamer and then through that to the dac despite the transformer galvanic isolation.

Or noise can be created in one or more of the intermediate devices and eventually end up in the dac.

That is why I use a switch in my network before the streamer and to my ears anyway that gives me better sound quality. And also to my ears not all switches are created equal

But I guess there is no sucking of Granny eggs in that.
 
What rf ingress mitigation do switches have that routers don't, typically?

Where's the data to show this being additionally effective on the output of the switch?

Where's the data to show this reduction affecting the output of a subsequently connected dac?

Here some investigation into noise pre dac.

Loading…

www.open-end-music.com

There's another big test on a blog site, similar results can't remember the site name though.
 
sq225917 said:
Here some investigation into noise pre dac.

Loading…

www.open-end-music.com

There's another big test on a blog site, similar results can't remember the site name though.​
Click to expand...

That chap seems to be the TomJ user who posted the same investigation at Audiophilestyle.
Have a look at HQPlayer's developer's comments from his topic (transcribed below), an expert in digital audio, unlike anyone that has been posting in this thread.
You'll enjoy his last comment...


I would also compare things like amount of hardware offload features. This affects how much CPU load network traffic generates. Usually server controllers offer more offload features.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163614


On 10/18/2021 at 12:39 AM, Cogito said:
The noise in the network is what causes problem to the audio. Ethernet cables act line antennas. They pickup all kinds of noise which enters the computer and eventually the DAC thru’ USB interface. Noise filtration/elimination is the key to good audio.​
Click to expand...
That is common mode noise that gets cancelled in the reception of differential signal. In addition, all the ethernet signals are transformer isolated and you don't have galvanic connection unless you spoil it with shielded ethernet cables...
Of course you can use optical ethernet where fibers cannot pick up any such noise on the way in first place, nor have any galvanic connection.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163705


On 10/18/2021 at 1:19 AM, Cogito said:
You can setup a Ethernet to optical converter, fiber cables and fiber optic NIC at fraction of the cost of audiophile NICs.​
Click to expand...
I don't use any audiophile networking gear. I get great results from regular ones, also from regular copper gear and CAT6 UTP cabling.
On 10/18/2021 at 1:24 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:
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.​
Click to expand...
I think SFP slot is good option because it keeps all the electronics related to physical link in a separate shielded metal cage. It also gives you flexibility to choose between optical and copper connections.
On 10/18/2021 at 7:14 AM, TomJ said:
As SFP converters have increased jitter, but also their power supplies are hard to optimize because the laser needs large currents to switch very fast, which is an EMI problem.​
Click to expand...
Have you measured this increased jitter? I don't think there's such. Also ethernet at default power has large currents, that's why I use 802.3az links where equipment measures cable length and uses reduced power for shorter links and also automatically goes into inactive idle state.
On 10/18/2021 at 7:14 AM, TomJ said:
But the signal itself can be considered noise at 31.25 MHz at 100base Tx.​
Click to expand...
But who would use 100baseTX? It's a bit too old spec typically lacking modern features. And not enough speed. 1000baseTX is pretty much requirement these days.
What I've measured DAC outputs so far. I've mostly seen ground link, PSU and USB related problems. With USB related problems I mean 8 kHz packet noise leaking through which is problem of the USB receiver in DAC.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163732


On 10/18/2021 at 9:59 AM, TomJ said:
Not myself. This was the info I get from an embedded ethernet engineer. But if you imagine that the signal has to be converted 2 x more, this statement does not seem outrageous to me. Regardless of the power consumption, it is an additional component that can produce noise.​
Click to expand...
There's no "2x more" or power consumption. You need same amount of components with or without SFP. SFP just moves PHY to a module.
On 10/18/2021 at 9:59 AM, TomJ said:
I don't know what features and what speed I should miss with 100base tx for music streaming. Less is more in my opinion - Fewer crosstalk, through less signal wire-pairs for example.​
Click to expand...
802.3az for example (cable length detection and idle sleep). And with 100baseTX you have worse transfer/sleep ratio, so every packet transfer takes 10x longer and produces 10x more noise. WIth 10 Gbps you have only tiny transfer blip every now and then, 100x less transfer noise.
In many cases 100baseTX begins to fail at DSD1024 or 1.5M PCM. Not to even mention 8 channels of DSD256 or 384/32 PCM which I can do with my exaSound DAC or Merging Hapi (which can do 16 channels of such total).
Any cross-talk is common mode signal which in turn is cancelled in the differential receiver.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163741


On 10/18/2021 at 11:20 AM, TomJ said:
In addition, there is a media conversion from power to optics that does not occur with Ethernet.​
Click to expand...
That's of course the optical isolation we are looking for? This is very low power, compared to the power blasted on magnetics for full cable length Ethernet (which you have unless you have cable length detection through 802.3az).
On 10/18/2021 at 11:20 AM, TomJ said:
IEEE 802.3az is not a feature of 1000base TX but is also specified for 100base tx.​
Click to expand...
It practically is. If you look at networking gear specs, 802.3az is practically never included in 100baseTX hardware, and falls off if you drop 1000baseTX controller to 100baseTX backwards-compliance.
On 10/18/2021 at 11:20 AM, TomJ said:
With regard to your calculation for the amount of noise, this is probably a bit simplistic. How do you measure the amount of noise? Status changes of the signal over time?​
Click to expand...
Amount of low level network activity as function of time. When people talk about audio "streaming" they think there is some constant traffic going on, which is not the case. All the network traffic is packet based. Just like USB too.
Higher the network speed, less time it takes to transfer a packet. Which improves active/idle ratio.
On 10/18/2021 at 11:20 AM, TomJ said:
Even if no stream is transmitted, the line is not silent.​
Click to expand...
This is specifically feature of 802.3az that the line can go silent.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163744


On 10/18/2021 at 9:49 PM, Cogito said:
The phrase galvanic isolation does not belong when discussing ethernet. Galvanic Isolation means, there is no electrical connection between the two end.
Click to expand...
Ethernet is transformer isolated, it is considered one of the possible methods of doing galvanic isolation. Another would be capacitive isolation which is sometimes used for things like USB. Third would be optical isolation.
So you cannot have things like ground currents flowing through copper ethernet, as long as you don't spoil it with shielded cables (which should never be used in audio environments).
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163847


On 10/18/2021 at 11:51 PM, Jud said:
Shielded cables, period, or shielded Ethernet cables?
Click to expand...
Shielded ethernet cables... STP/SFTP.
On 10/18/2021 at 11:51 PM, Jud said:
And by shielded, are we talking exclusively about shielding connected to ground at both ends?
Click to expand...
That is the only specification compliant shielded type. I would never recommend to use any non-spec compliant cable. I know there are many "ethernet" cables, just like there are many "USB" cables, that would never pass a certification test.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163853


Network doesn't have "sound quality", it has only functional quality that can be objectively assessed.
https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...for-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=1163900
 
tuga said:
That chap seems to be the TomJ user who posted the same investigation at Audiophilestyle.
Have a look at HQPlayer's developer's comments from his topic (transcribed below), an expert in digital audio, unlike anyone that has been posting in this thread.
Click to expand...

Once again you demonstrate that you are totally incapable of a single independant thought. This is all you used to do on the WAM, post an absolute deluge of graphs, charts, waffle and rubbish in the hope that with such an information overload people think you are clever

They don't and you're not.
 
vacuum_tubes said:
Once again you demonstrate that you are totally incapable of a single independant thought. This is all you used to do on the WAM, post an absolute deluge of graphs, charts, waffle and rubbish in the hope that with such an information overload people think you are clever

They don't and you're not.
Click to expand...

By quoting an expert I am "incapable a single independant thought" and guilty of posting "absolute deluge of" evidence, and yet you expect me to should trust your beliefs instead... Typical.
 
tuga said:
By quoting an expert I am "incapable a single independant thought" and guilty of posting "absolute deluge of" evidence, and yet you expect me to should trust your beliefs instead... Typical.
Click to expand...

He's not an expert for this discussion, you lack even the most basic knowledge so you can't comprehend what he is an expert in and how it's not relevant to this.

I gave up arguing with you years ago as you are monumentally bereft of any ability to learn or understand the discussion.

As Bill Murray says "never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
 
vacuum_tubes said:
He's not an expert for this discussion, you lack even the most basic knowledge so you can't comprehend what he is an expert in and how it's not relevant to this.

I gave up arguing with you years ago as you are monumentally bereft of any ability to learn or understand the discussion.

As Bill Murray says "never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
Click to expand...
And yet here you are, arguing with Ric in a thread (apologies if it was another thread) you stated you were going to leave pages ago!

I don’t always agree with Ric but one thing’s for sure he isn’t an idiot.

You just can’t help yourself can you, and what does that make you?
 
Well I'm not a shill for wave cables though :rolleyes:

I look forward to his next 10,000 words on networking by his NHS dentist as he is clearly an expert as well.
 
vacuum_tubes said:
Well I'm not a shill for wave cables though :rolleyes:

I look forward to his next 10,000 words on networking by his NHS dentist as he is clearly an expert as well.
Click to expand...
The main thing you seem to have achieved in this thread is an impressive level of rudeness and disrespect - if you are genuinely sure of your position, why not just relax and be a bit nicer 🙂 - people would then be far more likely to consider what you have to say
 
vacuum_tubes said:
Well I'm not a shill for wave cables though :rolleyes:

I look forward to his next 10,000 words on networking by his NHS dentist as he is clearly an expert as well.
Click to expand...
Neither am I!

Is life treating you badly at the moment and leading to you posting as you do? If so I’m sure we’d all sympathise and maybe tolerate your behaviour here.
 
Addressing the actual question posed by the OP, I would say that there's no one approach that's inherently superior - it's all about implementation. I have chosen to stick with Auralic's WiFi optimised approach - I'm happy to admit that not wishing to engage with lots of the issues raised in this thread played a large part in my initial decision to follow this route - I am also extremely happy with the results (Aries G1 with Hoer Wege power supply upgrade, sounds fantastic) - frankly I would rather spend my hifi funds on pretty much anything rather than what are basically glorified computer peripherals, but I am certainly not saying such things can't make a difference - I've heard enough other systems to be convinced that they absolutely do - YMMV etc - hifi is a broad church 👍
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top