Gustard Network Switch... Thoughts?

[Fourlegs]

Why can’t Innuous share some measurements to show that their switch makes a measurable difference to the noise that gets into their streamers? Surely it should be trivial to do this - they must already have such measurements, how else could they have designed it?

Probably because they know that people like you will never be convinced and so you are not a feasible customer. So quite simply there is nothing in it for them by publishing. Of course they will have their own design development measurements just as I do but experience has shown there is little to be achieved by publishing them never mind the intellectual property issues. Just the same way that Innuos have said they measured the noise in optical conversion circuits and so decided not to include optical outlets on their higher end streamers. They don’t need to publish that. It was just design development internal company information.

For the rest of us we chose the same way we chose amplifiers or speakers or streamers or dacs, ie we listen and if we like how it sounds we buy. If we don’t like it then we don’t buy.

 

[tuga]

It is aesthetically pleasing, would defo look better in a hifi rack than the couple of cheap ebay ciscos I had a mess with.

I like the look of the Cisco but the Gustard has the advantage of placing all cables at the back.
The Gustard doesn't cost a lot more than one of those Cisco but doesn't do optical/fibre.

Edit: I've just realised that the Gustard does have an SFP port.

 

[foxwelljsly]

Probably because they know that people like you will never be convinced and so you are not a feasible customer. So quite simply there is nothing in it for them by publishing. Of course they will have their own design development measurements just as I do but experience has shown there is little to be achieved by publishing them never mind the intellectual property issues. Just the same way that Innuos have said they measured the noise in optical conversion circuits and so decided not to include optical outlets on their higher end streamers. They don’t need to publish that. It was just design development internal company information.

Russell's teapot - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Fourlegs]

I like the look of the Cisco but the Gustard has the advantage of placing all cables at the back.
The Gustard doesn't cost a lot more than one of those Cisco but doesn't do optical/fibre.

I tend to hide my switches out of sight behind everything else and on the floor so how it looks is not important to me. A lack of optical/fibre is also of no consequence to me as all of my listening experiments proved to my ears that copper Ethernet with a good switch sounds better anyway.

 

[Fourlegs]

Russell's teapot - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is no burden of proof here. These are manufacturers selling household entertainment systems or devices. Where is the need or burden on them to prove anything?

 

[chiily]

Probably because they know that people like you will never be convinced and so you are not a feasible customer. So quite simply there is nothing in it for them by publishing. Of course they will have their own design development measurements just as I do but experience has shown there is little to be achieved by publishing them never mind the intellectual property issues. Just the same way that Innuos have said they measured the noise in optical conversion circuits and so decided not to include optical outlets on their higher end streamers. They don’t need to publish that. It was just design development internal company information.

For the rest of us we chose the same way we chose amplifiers or speakers or streamers or dacs, ie we listen and if we like how it sounds we buy. If we don’t like it then we don’t buy.

Do a simple null test between with switch/cable and without switch/cable...publish the difference as a graph, simple?

 

[Amber Audio]

I like the look of the Cisco but the Gustard has the advantage of placing all cables at the back.
The Gustard doesn't cost a lot more than one of those Cisco but doesn't do optical/fibre.

The N18

I like the look of the Cisco but the Gustard has the advantage of placing all cables at the back.
The Gustard doesn't cost a lot more than one of those Cisco but doesn't do optical/fibre.

If you hang around eBay for a bit you’ll get that lot for under a £ton.

The Gustards have SFP slots. Also LAN5 is separated out and labelled Internet, to me they are treating it like a WAN feed and implying some special treatment/filter/shielding - or it’s just some stencilled text.

 

[tuga]

The N18
If you hang around eBay for a bit you’ll get that lot for under a £ton.

The Gustards have SFP slots. Also LAN5 is separated out and labelled Internet, to me they are treating it like a WAN feed and implying some special treatment/filter/shielding - or it’s just some stencilled text.

I am doing something similar but have used Wi-Fi instead of fibre between the router and the switch, mostly to avoid having a cable trailing along from the entrance lobby to one end of the living room.

 

[AndyU]

Probably because they know that people like you will never be convinced and so you are not a feasible customer. So quite simply there is nothing in it for them by publishing. Of course they will have their own design development measurements just as I do but experience has shown there is little to be achieved by publishing them never mind the intellectual property issues. Just the same way that Innuos have said they measured the noise in optical conversion circuits and so decided not to include optical outlets on their higher end streamers. They don’t need to publish that. It was just design development internal company information.

For the rest of us we chose the same way we chose amplifiers or speakers or streamers or dacs, ie we listen and if we like how it sounds we buy. If we don’t like it then we don’t buy.

I would absolutely be convinced of your claims about ethernet and RF noise were Innuos to publish evidence that it degrades the performance of their streamers. You seem to know them. Why not ask them? I guarantee that if you or they produce such evidence I will get a demonstration and buy if I hear a difference and think it’s worth paying for.

 

[Fourlegs]

I would absolutely be convinced of your claims about ethernet and RF noise were Innuos to publish evidence that it degrades the performance of their streamers. You seem to know them. Why not ask them? I guarantee that if you or they produce such evidence I will get a demonstration and buy if I hear a difference and think it’s worth paying for.

I have no dog in that race at all. It is nothing to me whether you even consider one of their streamers.

Although I don’t think anyone is suggesting it degrades the performance of their streamers. Rather that if they output optical then the receiving dac there will have to be an optical to electrical signal conversion circuit and I think that may have been what they were measuring. Unless they were suggesting that the optical generating circuit in their streamer would itself be noisy to the extent of polluting the other outputs.

It is all academic to me anyway because I take the usb output (it’s only output) from my Innuos and convert it to BNC because I find that sounds best into my Chord Mscaler. Which reminds me, I need to start a new thread on the new Chord Mscaler.

 

[Amber Audio]

I am doing something similar but have used Wi-Fi instead of fibre between the router and the switch, mostly to avoid having a cable trailing along from the entrance lobby to one end of the living room.

Seen this?

AirLens

The AirLens interface brings perfection to streaming Streaming audio via Roon or other services like Qobuz, Tidal, and Spotify offers millions of titles at the touch of a finger. Unfortunately, connecting your sensitive DAC to noise-generating computers, routers, NAS, local networks, and...

www.psaudio.com

 

[tuga]

Seen this?

AirLens

The AirLens interface brings perfection to streaming Streaming audio via Roon or other services like Qobuz, Tidal, and Spotify offers millions of titles at the touch of a finger. Unfortunately, connecting your sensitive DAC to noise-generating computers, routers, NAS, local networks, and...

www.psaudio.com

I hadn't, but I am happy with my (wired) microRendu running HQPlayer NAA.

 

[sq225917]

Yeah, hilarious I’m sure. But no none is saying or claiming there are any transmission errors. The only person claiming that claim is being made is you.

You misread me, I wasn't trying to imply data transmission errors, I was stating that the interfaces are in the same on some audio devices as on computer networks, yet you never hear of computers bluescreening due to rf/emi ingress from a network card.

 

[Fourlegs]

You misread me, I wasn't trying to imply data transmission errors, I was stating that the interfaces are in the same on some audio devices as on computer networks, yet you never hear of computers bluescreening due to rf/emi ingress from a network card.

Sorry, I can only go on what you posted, ie “I still find it amazing that computers connected to networks receiving packets of data work without errors but dacs just cant manage it.... you streaming guys ste literally taking your lives in your own hands”

 

[Colin L]

It is aesthetically pleasing, would defo look better in a hifi rack than the couple of cheap ebay ciscos I had a mess with.

Which currently reside in my system, but hidden away.

 

[Amber Audio]

Which currently reside in my system, but hidden away.

Seems worth the minor expense for peace of mind in the context of your system. I'm using Fibre Optic MC instead, nothing needed in my rack, all gubbins in garage, IT is on a separate CU from AV system room.

Might buy one of those N18 Pro for a mess, if I do you can have a shot.

 

[P270]

£439 via eBay...

Too cheap.....

Russ Andrews - Hi-Fi mains and cable specialist

Leading manufacturer and retailer of Hi-Fi mains cables, mains conditioning products and Kimber Kable interconnects and speaker cable. Est 1986.

www.russandrews.com

 

[TheFlash]

I must ask my ISP to change all the network swtiches in their entire network, and also change the one in my network router etc at home to get rid of that pesky noise and interference on my Netflix HDR 4k UHD video, which is totally ruining my ablity to enjoy the picture quality on my OLED TV.

This is silly, and hopefully you know this. Digital is digital, so the network as a whole just works. When you get into the home, you simply need to focus on the switch closest to your hifi/AV system; a decent switch will kill a huge amount of any noise accumulated to that point. If you don't have any, it will have an easy life of course! But if like most people you do then it will surprise you.

To repeat what has been said on many related threads over the years, there is no digital magic going on in an audiophile switch. Just ensure you install it in the right place and bingo.

 

[TheFlash]

Exactly, the mangnetics will be built into the RJ45 port itself and include a common mode choke, all this guff about noise is nonsens.

So you haven't tried a switch then, even a basic non-audio-optimised one? Just (0.5m ideally) before your streamer? Because you simply know it can't make a difference? Your loss, seriously. I didn't design my switches to solve a non-existent problem... just try a switch in the right posotion and report back.

 

[TheFlash]

I still find it amazing that computers connected to networks receiving packets of data work without errors but dacs just cant manage it.... you streaming guys ste literally taking your lives in your own hands

Because you are stuck with your digital spectacles on your nose. There is no digital specialness in an audiophile network switch.

Anyway, you don't even stream so your point is?