Do I really need an " Audio Grade Network Switch "?

[sachinchavan 15865]

What is meant by time sequence and how is it relevant in music data and not in other data?

Because music is about timing. It doesn’t matter to me if a word document loads from top to bottom or bottom to top when I open it. But even a millisecond of a timing delay between reproduction of the notes can spoil the listening experience.

I’d like the techies to explain this further. My laymanly understanding ends here.

 

[keith_correa]

Please read about buffers in streamers/DAC's and what they do. This is what the DAC interfaces with.

Can multiple guys try this on their streamers: While data is being streamed over the network and music is playing, abruptly unplug the input - it doesn't matter from which device it is. Does the music stop at the very instant you unplug the input? Or does it keep playing for a very little while longer before it stops? Please do let me know what you find.

 

[chander]

@keith_correa - Primary streaming platform - Spotify. Streaming settings set to - the best Spotify has to offer.
On MacBook - Over Wifi - random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music switch off wifi around 15 seconds mark on the first song - 3 songs play without interruption. You can forward or reverse the song using the slider, change to the next song (for a total of 3) using the next or previous button. And you can play them "atleast" 3 times, which is what I tried.

On MacBook - Over Wifi with Apple Music- random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music switch off wifi around 4 second mark - 1 song plays without interruption. Again lossless song, highest streaming setting. Like Spotify, can use the slider. The songs can't be played again though only slider to restart the song works - atleast in my case.

On Wiim Pro - Over Ethernet -random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music - pull the cable around 12 second mark - 1 song plays full. However here I had no control over anything, the song just played and then was done.

Using iPad (wifi only - no LTE) as a streamer - results were similar to the Macbook.

 

[keith_correa]

@keith_correa - Primary streaming platform - Spotify. Streaming settings set to - the best Spotify has to offer.
On MacBook - Over Wifi - random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music switch off wifi around 15 seconds mark on the first song - 3 songs play without interruption. You can forward or reverse the song using the slider, change to the next song (for a total of 3) using the next or previous button. And you can play them "atleast" 3 times, which is what I tried.

On MacBook - Over Wifi with Apple Music- random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music switch off wifi around 4 second mark - 1 song plays without interruption. Again lossless song, highest streaming setting. Like Spotify, can use the slider. The songs can't be played again though only slider to restart the song works - atleast in my case.

On Wiim Pro - Over Ethernet -random playlist never played before - streaming not downloaded - start the music - pull the cable around 12 second mark - 1 song plays full. However here I had no control over anything, the song just played and then was done.

Using iPad (wifi only - no LTE) as a streamer - results were similar to the Macbook.

Thank you! Your findings are what I expected to happen.

 

[chander]

Also I have a few questions about master clocks. From a noob point of view - so please go easy.

1 -Where should a master clock be in the system?
2 -Do all digital devices act as slave clock to the master clock? So their internal clocks become redundant?

 

[keith_correa]

There are clocks and then there are clocks.

{A} The clocks [master or slaves] on networked devices, from a networking standpoint, are to do with PTP (Precision Time Protocol) and have their role to play in networked devices - nothing whatsoever to do with just audio data but with just data. They do what they are supposed to do and do it well - let's not even go there.

{B} The clock used by the DAC is distinct, separate and has nothing at all to do with the clock referred to in {A}.

Edit: I might be wrong here so please feel free to correct me.

 

[chander]

There are clocks and then there are clocks.

{A} The clocks [master or slaves] on networked devices, from a networking standpoint, are to do with PTP (Precision Time Protocol) and have their role to play in networked devices - nothing whatsoever to do with just audio data but with just data. They do what they are supposed to do and do it well - let's not even go there.

{B} The clock used by the DAC is distinct, separate and has nothing at all to do with the clock referred to in {A}.

Edit: I might be wrong here so please feel free to correct me.

So going by what you are saying and what I am reading a little bit, to simplify (obviously it can't be but I am at alphabet learning stage of Master Clocks)

1 - A master clock lets say pre DAC - in or outside the source - is then sending "perfect data" to the DAC - which is then doing the D to A conversion.
2 - Now assuming the DAC's internal clock is 100% accurate (let's assume for fun) - then out put is perfect as per the Master clock - all done & dusted.
3 - Now let's assume the DAC's internal clock is not 100% accurate - so now the data that the DAC is putting out - has it's own "imperfections", so what the Master clock did is nullified?

 

[keith_correa]

Assuming we're still talking network:

Firstly, you need a clock to sync timing between multiple networked devices on multiple ports - Parallel. If you have one networked device on one port - Serial, what's to sync?

 

[mbhangui]

I believe he is talking about the DAC clocks. Let me explain it simplistically. Let say you have to start a meeting exactly at 16:00:00 PM. You have a wrist watch which is fairly accurate made by casio computer company. You wear that watch in your left hand. It is now 15:00:00 PM. Your casio clock looses 5 seconds every hour. When you start the meeting at 16:00:00 PM you will be approximately 5 seconds late. This casio is your internal clock. Now you can splurge money and get a clock made by Omega/Rolex/Seiko and wear it on your right hand. This is your external clock. If you follow the right hand clock you will start the meeting exactly at 16:00:00 PM when your left hand watch will be showing 15:59:55. What effect it will have on the meeting I can't say.

I'm not a CS guy but here is my understanding. If you have an inaccurate clock, and let's say you are playing cd quality music, the music data which is sampled at 44,100 times in a second may play at a sample rate of 44,099 times in a second if the clock is slower or 44,106 times in a second if your clock is faster. Maybe if you have golden ears you could hear it . But I don't think you are a true audiophile and hence probably shouldn't be fretting over an extra super precise external master clock. Just listen to music rather than worrying over clocks and what the nasty thing your switch is doing with super noisy power supplies , making Lata Mangeshkar sound like Asha Bhonsle or vice versa. You can do this in a LP player by playing the record at the wrong speed.

 

[chander]

But I don't think you are a true audiophile and hence probably shouldn't be fretting over an extra super precise external master clock.

Thanks a ton for the explanation. I understood something atleast This was purely for knowledge - not getting into it at all.

 

[balavignesh002]

Precision Time Protocol

Not available on all switches. Only SNTP or NTP are generally available on all switches.

external clock

Great explanation,
I thought external clocks use case will be to use single clock when data is transferred from source (CDT) to DAC via digital transport (spdif), so that both will have proper sync.

 

[amit11]

Review is long pending after plugging this into the system.
Actually i was myself waiting to get my impressions confirmed before posting anything half-baked.

I was reading something on the net about fibre network and audio, which co-relates to my experience.


Noise can brighten up a dull system. It can also be very enjoyable.

I don’t enjoy noise any more. It is the enemy of purity.

I will put more details in my further post...

time for some review:

My current setup had a tp-link wifi extender. My apple airport express was connected to it using WIFI.
Then I also had switched off the wifi of apple airport express and connected a lan cable from the extender to the airport express. So both variations i have listened.

Then, After purchasing the fibre optic kit and plugging into my system, below are my observations:

1. Immediate observations:

a) As soon as i put the fibre into the chain and started listening music, the very first relevation was "Lower floor noise". This was apparent immediatley.

b) Another thing i noticed was the mid bass had slightly increased. To put in other words, the noise which was present earlier used to eat away this bass.
Now, this new thing gave a more "TRUER" timbre to instruments. Which means this also gave a more TRUER TONALITY to the voice.

c) More clarity across the board.

Above 3 were the immediate observations.


2. Some improvement:

Now the tp-link fibre media convertors were running on their own stock SMPS. So it had its own artifacts. Minor i would say.
So I powered them using battery pack and those artifacts had signifcantly reduced i would say. I was happy and now happier.


3. Some more improvment:
My original was a tp-link wifi extender which was directly plugged into the socket as i have mentioned above. So there was no chance to power it using a battery pack. So i purchased another tp-link router which came with its own power supply and can be kept away from the wall. So this time i powered this also with my battery pack. I compared both using stock power supply and battery pack, and yes the battery pack had a cleaner sound. I was now even more happier.


How much A/B comparison i did in these 20 days?
Honestly from day 1, i did not ever feel the need to do any A/B comparison. But out of habit i had to.
I would say only twice i switched back to LAN cable and that too for less than 5 minutes. As soon as i put the LAN cable, i clearly give a thumbs down and put the fibre back...

I now realize that LAN cable can introduce such noise that we can never find out unless we try something new, like this optical. Even if we use $1000 LAN cable, i dont think it can compete with the fibre thing.

Final comments
a) Obvisouly this is not day-and-night difference. (but read point (b) also)
b) But once you hear it, you will NOT go back to original lan cable setup.
c) Once you hears this, you may get a feeling that what "Junk" i was hearing till now.
d) You will realize how electrical NOISE is so much invisible and is so much elusive.
e) This Optical is the direction to spend more money and for further improvements. (Not on the copper of LAN wire)


I recall @bornfi was the first one, who 2 years back mentioned about this optical setup in his post. i was obviously not able to comprehend at that time and was a disbeliever. But i am glad i tried this.

I got chance to meet @ishmeet73 in pune and we tried this in his setup aswell. His setup is way advanced then mine. He also felt the differnce and same day he also ordered the optical kit.

Overall i am NOT going back to the original copper Lan... this is the way to go.


regards,
amit11

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

Then, After purchasing the fibre optic kit and plugging into my system, below are my observations:

Amit, can you please specify what this fibre kit comprises of and where did you put it exactly in your chain?

 

[ishmeet73]

I recall @bornfi was the first one, who 2 years back mentioned about this optical setup in his post. i was obviously not able to comprehend at that time and was a disbeliever. But i am glad i tried this.

I got chance to meet @ishmeet73 in pune and we tried this in his setup aswell. His setup is way advanced then mine. He also felt the differnce and same day he also ordered the optical kit.

Overall i am NOT going back to the original copper Lan... this is the way to go.


regards,
amit11

I have to thank @amit11 for actually bringing over his optical fiber kit to my place, this after installing the Bonn8. Even with the Bonn 8 you could hear the difference in SQ and separation.

I immediately order a SFP module kit with cables and had it installed. Can't think of going back to copper, for LAN atleast.

 

[amit11]

Amit, can you please specify what this fibre kit comprises of and where did you put it exactly in your chain?

There are 5 things required.

a, b, c - Compulsary
d, e - Optional. They are basically for better power supply.


a) TWO units of Fibre Media convertor. Tp-Link
FMC = Fibre media convertor

This converts from LAN to optical, and vice-versa. Note, 2 units are required.

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B0034CSUD0?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title&th=1


b) Optical wire. Note, 2 pieces will be required

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B06ZYDWR9V?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

c) An extra LAN cable will be required. Normal 1 metre is also fine. Not necessary that it should be short.


d) A better power supply for the two units in point (a).
I use this battery pack.
It has two USB outs and it can server both the FMC units in point a.

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B0CTHZ8XMG?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

e) If you are using point (d), then these cables are also required. Basically USB output to barrel output to power the FMCs in point a.
This comes with 5 such cables, but for our need two are sufficient.
https://www.amazon.in/dp/B07N8CWW4G?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title



Where we should put this in the chain?

Lets say currently we have like this.

Wifi router/repeater ---------------------------------- LAN Cable --------------------------------------------------------- Streamer


Then, it would be something like this.


Wifi router/repeater --------------LanCable1 -------- FMC_Unit1------Two _ Optical_Wires----------FMC_Unit2-----------LanCable2---------------- Streamer


regards,
amit11.

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

There are 5 things required.

a, b, c - Compulsary
d, e - Optional. They are basically for better power supply.


a) TWO units of Fibre Media convertor. Tp-Link
FMC = Fibre media convertor

This converts from LAN to optical, and vice-versa. Note, 2 units are required.

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B0034CSUD0?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title&th=1


b) Optical wire. Note, 2 pieces will be required

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B06ZYDWR9V?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

c) An extra LAN cable will be required. Normal 1 metre is also fine. Not necessary that it should be short.


d) A better power supply for the two units in point (a).
I use this battery pack.
It has two USB outs and it can server both the FMC units in point a.

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B0CTHZ8XMG?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

e) If you are using point (d), then these cables are also required. Basically USB output to barrel output to power the FMCs in point a.
This comes with 5 such cables, but for our need two are sufficient.
https://www.amazon.in/dp/B07N8CWW4G?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title



Where we should put this in the chain?

Lets say currently we have like this.

Wifi router/repeater ---------------------------------- LAN Cable --------------------------------------------------------- Streamer


Then, it would be something like this.


Wifi router/repeater --------------LanCable1 -------- FMC_Unit1------Two _ Optical_Wires----------FMC_Unit2-----------LanCable2---------------- Streamer


regards,
amit11.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. So the idea is to convert Ethernet to Optical and then back to Ethernet so that the interference is minimised (by replacing Ethernet cable with Optical cable for larger part of the signal transmission). But then, why two optical cables?

Also makes me wonder, these days we have fibre optical bring in the internet to our homes. Then why don’t we have routers that simply transfer the optical itself to the equipment? Why are those routers converting into Ethernet signal? This dual conversion can be avoided altogether in that case.

 

[bobbyprajan]

Why are those routers converting into Ethernet signal? This dual conversion can be avoided altogether in that case.

There is no conversion. Whether you are running fiber or copper media, the protocol is Ethernet (802.3d)

 

[amit11]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. So the idea is to convert Ethernet to Optical and then back to Ethernet so that the interference is minimised (by replacing Ethernet cable with Optical cable for larger part of the signal transmission). But then, why two optical cables?

Also makes me wonder, these days we have fibre optical bring in the internet to our homes. Then why don’t we have routers that simply transfer the optical itself to the equipment? Why are those routers converting into Ethernet signal? This dual conversion can be avoided altogether in that case.

Why two optical cables?
Actually this depends upon the type of fibre media convertor. Some are designed for single cable and some are designed for two optical cables.
The one in my link is designed for two cables.
In general I also had read somewhere that two cables sounded slightly better than single cable technology.


Why routers do not have optical, and mainly have ethernet?
I would say for routers the main use for domestic purpose is ethernet out.
There could be few routers (Yet to find) which could be providing optical out aswell. So yes, if are able to find such router than we can skip one step. i.e. we will then require only 1 FMC unit instead of 2.