Jump to content

Assisi

Member
  • Posts

    2,476
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Assisi

  1. I had the first version of the PS audio DS DAC with FPGA. When it was released, it was reasonably well reviewed. One review included measurements. The measurements indicated that there was an aspect of its performance that was not right even though on listening it was fine. Ted Smith the designer of the FPGA OS code, at the time naturally took the measurements comments on board as it was his baby. He purchased a much more sensitive and very expensive Oscilloscope. He found where the problem was in the code and produced an updated OS. I seem to remember the new OS was marginally better. My understanding is that with the FPGA OS code various compiles of the same code sounded different. They listen to the various compiles, which code wise are the same and choose the best based on just listening and release the agreed "best". If the code is the same, how would you measure a difference as the listening variation is probably very subtle? Even though supposedly they are the same but there is listening differences. So maybe the answer to your comment is a no. I haven’t had the DAC for some years so I have not followed its progress closely. In the early days I think some of the PS DAC Aficionados were sent various compiles to play around with. Each compile had a number. John
  2. Craig, Is the lack of introspection limited to just one side of the discussion? To me it could equally apply to all posters on this topic and similar and other threads and even many other forums. I am definitely not exempt from a lack of introspection. I do however constantly ask my self the questions of what is happening and why on a myriad of audio topics. What is real and what is not and maybe imagined and reflective of possible bias. What are the answers? It is partly what attracts me to the pursuit of audio as well as the listening. John
  3. Spot on. To me the more "organic" the sound becomes the more it seems to be alive and engaging. To me, it is an important attribute of how my system sounds. John
  4. It is not unique to more expensive specialist cables. As well, performance issues may not be to do with cables per se. The underlying design, construction and manufacture of cables can used to confuse matters when the cable is not an issue at all. The problem is somewhere else. Some years ago, I had a PS Audio DS with the first version of the FPGA OS. Playback through the DAC with numerous USB cables would time out after short periods of time. The time period varied whether it was a basic cable or one that was qualified as audio. I only had one cable that did not time out. It happened for many users of the first DS and there were many complaints. Mike McGowan and Ted Smith’s stock answer was the failures were all because the cables were not USB compliant. Just buy a Belden cable and everything would be fine. Total nonsense. After a time, a new version of the FPGA OS was released. Every single cable I had never timed out from then on with the new OS. No more complaints. John
  5. Please have a rest. Maybe a good drop out of a Riedel Glass would be beneficial. John
  6. Therefore, to me there are some obvious questions? Using the analogy of the benefits of decanting , the questions relate to possible aspects of the consequences of how the file is handled as it passes through a router or switch: Would you say therefore · That the file cannot changed in any way during the journey through the unit? · That is, what comes out is absolutely identical in every way in terms of what went in? · If there can be changes, what can the changes be and if so, why? John
  7. Is it possible that the shape of the decanter and depending on the degree of exposure to the air there can be a variation with taste and bouquet through decanting?
  8. I and others are talking in this thread -about matters, experiences and perspectives in entirely different universes. It seems to me that it will be very difficult to achieve even limited consensus in the context of posts on SNA of the different perspectives. Another approach is needed. John
  9. In a post above the one quoted you mentioned Clocks. They and other aspects of networking for audio are very important. A number of posters on SNA come from the perspective of extensive networking experience, theory understanding and knowledge. The experience etc is probably limited or non-existent in the context and requirements of audio networking and streaming. In fact, for someone like me to say what I do, is probably just a little bit challenging to the theory. I know very little about the technicalities. I do not need to know much to make things work for me. My understanding is that the extensive networks around the world obey the TCP/IP rules, standards and protocols. Without the rules etc the extensive universal wired connectivity would fail. The rules etc were developed so that all the packets arrive on time and intact at the specific destination. It definitely works. However, the rules etc were not developed so as to comply with today’s requirements of high level quality audio streaming. With an audio network in your home, the timing and how intact the 1s and 0s are, is absolutely critical to the listening experience. What happens before the audio stream reaches you house network is not as important as after the stream reaches your own network. The house network switches with serious clocks, quality cables and power supplies from my experience can significantly improve the streaming playback SQ experience. It is about the Time Domain. The Frequency Domain happens later. Quality clocks deal and improve the timing and jitter situation. Components in and the design of the switches and power supplies can deal with interference and resonance. For example, the port lights in some switches do not exist or they can be turned off. The flicking lights can cause interference. The potential for resonance and interference in the network can be in many places. You and others may question and ask why quality switches can improve the outcome in the last few Metres. To me it is analogous to the question as to why the last few Metres of a quality power cable can improve the listening outcome as the power has already travelled 100s or 1000s of Kms. They just do. I just appreciate the outcome. Everything matters. John
  10. To me the expressions about dark, veil and blanket are related and are very real phenomena. To me it is about a lower noise floor. Less noise. When you experience the impact your listening experience is enhanced. It is probable many people experience the benefits of a lower noise floor and do not realise when it happens and do not appreciate the outcome. I didn't when it first happened. To me it is the audio holy grail John
  11. A few years go when I first tried audio switches and cables it was just for music stored on a NAS. No streaming at all. I then tried streaming and liked it. The benefits that I attain from the network switches and cables and filters to me has nothing to do with buffered audio stream and everything to do with how the devices and cables manage what goes through. I understand that you are happy with your present setup. You might be a bit challenged and surprised by the outcome if you tried an audio switch instead of the switches that you use. I do not use the network for Video. Just free to air and a Bluray player. I consider that for audio, 100Mbps is better than higher speed. John
  12. I use the Wrouter just as a switch. I am going to investigate having a router including wifi connected to the NBN box to separate the audio from the rest of the network. Most or all of us with our audio are on different journeys with an intention of reaching a similar destination. The best sounding outcome. To me there is as strong relationship between price, component quality and outcomes (destination). The law of diminishing returns will always prevail. It is possible to achieve a very decent outcome with lower priced components. Based on what you say this is the case with CRS 305. However, I suggest a device designed/engineered for audio purposes whilst more expensive will probably provide an even better final outcome. The ingredients above that you describe for a switch will have a definite price attached. I also tinker. Not much with the network though. It seems to me that with your tinkering you make a number changes in short periods of time. I do think that is not a good thing to do. When moving stuff around, there needs to be a reasonable time period for the things to settle down again. Often several days. Only then will you be able to detect whether there is a actual benefit or not. You say the tinkering produces excellent sound. That only means some thing to you and relative to what? In some cases maybe the expression “You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear” is applicable. John John
  13. To me you are coming at this matter from a perspective that is not orientated towards the audio requirements of a network. I cannot to explain why what you are trying to say is not relevant to me. My understanding is that jitter and timing is critical in the quality of audio digital performance. I do wonder whether you are aware of the fundamental importance of jitter and timing with audio. When I mentioned my previous NBN experience I did not stream at all. When I tried my first couple of audio switches, I did not stream at all. Everything I listened to came from a quality NAS. I resisted steaming for a long time even though I had components that I could use to stream. I now stream and the quality is seriously excellent and I am sure it is because of the network and switches. So, what you are saying is not appropriate to me. I upset and annoy some posters when I say go and try and experience what I can experience. So reluctantly in this case again I say try it. Forget the theory. John
  14. I did say audio switches. With the strategies I mentioned there is an expense and therefore that is reflected in the price of the device but also probably in the outcome. As in all audio, I do not think that there is is a low cost benefit outcome equivalent to a higher cost one. Everything is relative. I do not have the answer. The NBN box and its relative speed is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. As I have said previously maybe you need to start again with a serious audio switch that is affordable to you and forget about the permutations and combinations of FMC, sfp, optical, Ethernet and Etheregen etc. In the end I predict it will be better outcome for you. John
  15. Few that come to mind. There must be others as well · The quality of the internal components, wiring, clocks and sockets · CNC construction of the device box including separate compartments to section off and isolate components and prevent some resonance getting in and internal interference · Internal linear power supplies · Battery power · Cable quality, construction and plugs Not all network devices and cables would include all of the above but they would feature in some ways in the better more expensive devices and cables. With my comment about the NBN I am not talking about NBN speeds at all. My comment is what I understand about internal network activity, control and interrupts and the probable benefit for the audio signal. There are clocks and there are many clocks. You mention the one in the CRS 305 as being “largish”. Size of itself is not necessarily an indicator of quality. Some clocks chips alone probably cost many times more than the CRS 305. A SNA member a couple of days ago created five convolution filters for ROON for me That evening I wanted to compare the outcome. Short time listening and power failure. Due to three power failures and other factors, I turned my system off. I did not get to listen again for 36 hours. All components including switches were cold. I turned the system on and the outcome was quite disappointing. Now I have never experienced any noticeable improvement when the amps etc start cold. After a few hours and I was listening to the best I have heard from my system with the filters running. Fantastic. My assumption was that the clocks in the switches needed to warm up as they are all OCXO hence the initial SQ disappointment. Normally I never turn the network including the switches off. Quality clocks are very important. John
  16. As @dbastin says There seems to me to be various matters in the context networking for audio that you are not aware of and therefore do not realise the consequences of mitigation strategies. I do not have any technical expertise to explain why my listening of audio switches in my network perceives benefits. All I have is my listening. You said in a post above " and glad to see a “normal” network vendor switch delivered a desired outcome" I would expect that to be so and also in the case of enterprise switches and similar. Considerably better than just "desired" can be achieved with an audio switch. I only discovered the benefit when I tried one and progressively moved up the food chain. NBN was installed at my place a few years ago. It included a new router modem. After a few days I realised that the SQ was very slightly better. It was small but it was a definite benefit happening. Why I wondered? The only change at the time was NBN. I asked around and the suggestion was that the new Router modem operated faster then the old ADSL box. System interrupts and therefore network timing was faster. An important aspect of a quality switch is the clock. Jitter and Timing! It all makes a difference. Another probable important aspect of the design of an audio switch is the quality of the internal components and features to reduce resonance and interference. John
  17. You haven't even started. I am up to 17 maybe 18. Its not easy to be precise because of what a friend calls the vipers nest. Six cables are for the network switches. No more! John
  18. Was it intended that the target in the image included windmills. The meaning of the expression tilting at windmills includes pursuit of a vain goal. Don Quixote attacked windmills as he thought that they were evil giants. John
  19. The caps was intended solely as heading to encapsulate my suggestion. I thought that my post might not go down well. I still consider that there may benefit if you start again as I suggested. I also understand your reluctance. What is more important to you? Playing files from a NAS for example or streaming from the net. That would then determine where you put your resources to achieve the best outcome. I am focused on local and not the net. You and I are approaching the matter from different directions. It would be interesting to know how many people who have had a Etheregen and no longer have them or do not use them as they have moved to something better. I consider that the Etheregen was an important contribution start to the utilisation of audio networking at an attractive price point. Maybe this is no longer so because of what has come along. If you consider your present investment plus what you might spend to add further possible enhancements, you probably have more than enough to try another high level switch and achieve better outcomes. The BOON N8 is being used because I have it and I want to keep it for the time being. I only moved the PP Quad for a time as I did not have space for it with the other components adjacent to me system. It is now back after the Waversa(s) and before the SoTM.
  20. START AGAIN. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE SWITCH. “Extremely good or even just good”. What does “good” mean in the context of your setup and compared to what? I started with a Netgear 108 switch with inexpensive FMCs with SFPs and cat6 cables. I thought that the result was good. Until I tried an audio switch and AQ Diamond cables. That was definitely better. Since then, I have been through various components and cables and the better has become even better still. Now I know that my early good was just very ordinary. That you find 2X optical provides a result that pleases you suggests to me that the optical is mitigating possible problems with other aspects of your setup. I have no idea as to what the issues might be and how to identify them. It may be more advantageous to start again. I think that it may be beneficial to take all of your network bits including the Etheregen and put them away in a box in a cupboard. Then start again with a reasonably serious audio switch. The switch and its respective audio quality is the key to success. Decide what you can afford and then spend more. Maybe a SoTM with a clock. You can achieve a serious network outcome without optical at all. With any of the quality cables that you have then connect the new switch to the NBN box, Server, NAS if you have it and the streamer. I assume that the NBN box in your case is a distance from the Server. Use a CAT 6 cable. No optical. Simple setup. If the simple setup is not better than what you have now, I will be most surprised. Then you could put in a second switch and start the journey. In the future you could replace the CAT6 with optical and compare. One step at a time. Some switches are AC in and some are not. As you would be aware you can spend more on a LPS than the cost of the device that it will power. A good LPS makes a difference. A switch with AC in can be cost wise less expensive overall. Unfortunately, the SoTM improves with a LPS. This adds to the overall cost. I had a Renolabs with optical. It is AC in. I liked it. I thought the Melco was better but it is more expensive. I did not have the space when the Melco came for the Renolabs so it went to a new owner. You could probably purchase a Renolabs for less than what you would pay for a Etheregen plus quality LPS. Optical is more cost. John
  21. It is an explanation provided by others who know and understand this aspect of networking better that I do. What I did experience when I tried two optical links was a definite flat boring sound compared to only one link even though I was using audio switches with optical capability The sound is cleaner but the musical life of the sound is less. A RJ45 network is one rabbit hole. Optical is a series of holes. A warren. John
  22. I did both because I had them and I could use them. I haven't bothered to determine whether there was a benefit using them where I did. I would expect maybe a benefit. What is far more important to me is the downstream components and cables that I have. They are impressively serious outcome. John .
  23. Very easily especially if they are not designed to reduce the emission of interference or resonance in that they are not designed or engineered for audio purposes. For me isolation strategies (not optical fibre) can bring about important SQ benefits. Isolation includes separation. For audio purposes it is probably not good at all. As others and I have said we have tried various low level FMCs. Definitely disappointed. John
  24. I suggest as per your photo, that having the FMC and the NBN box so close together is definitely not beneficial. I like others have tried low end FMCs. Not a good outcome. It may be better to have an audio FMC such as a Sonore opticalModule. You can do a home trial of one. I have a BONN N8 switch connected to the NBN box. Then the switch connected to a Sonore FMC. They are each separated and powered by LPS. The 15mt fibre optical is connected to a Melco If you continue with two fibre optical links, I suggest that you try and compare to just one. If two is better for you I wonder why? It is not my experience and that of others that I know. With two fibre optical there are four conversions. A potential for dynamic and harmonic loss. John
  25. Wow. I suggest that the contents of the one line post quoted above could be considered in the context of "Don't frighten the horses" Anybody who is exploring the possibility or just starting out on the network journey would despair as to how to implement what you propose. As well, for me I question the validity of your latest experience. It would take considerable time and effort to even get to where you are now. From my own experience I am not sure that what you have done would actually benefit and achieve the out comes that you suggest. I think that you have two optical fibre connections in your preferred option. One optical may be beneficial but two or more no way . Even one is questionable due to the impact of the conversions that happen with optical. I have just tried Sonore to Melco and SOtM to Melco each with good powers supplies. Flat and boring sound. Sonore to Melco okay. A fundamental feature of a quality network outcome is RJ45 copper and switches with serious clocks. There are no short cuts. John
×
×
  • Create New...
To Top