Wondering if I can call on the forum’s expertise as to whether my network/cabling is as optimum as can be. Been reading that ideally the switches should be kept away from the hi-fi kit but if I was to do that, that would mean a bunch of long ethernet cables trailing round the room which wouldn’t look great.
I was planning on getting another switch maybe, and having that run off the Cisco 2960 (with another AQ Cinnamon) and then the NDX off that using existing AQ Cinnamon but wondering that’s really necessary. And yes, the AQ cables made a positive difference to these ears (let’s not go there).
Any advice or pointers would be gratefully received. I’m a total novice on this front and it’s a miracle that I’ve been able to produce any sound at all.
Hi Catcat, your network looks to me to be pretty well OK & I’m not sure any changes will do anything better.
I don’t believe another switch will do anything positive.
I’ve not read/heard that having a switch close to the audio is detrimental, I don’t buy it personally, can you show where I can read up on that please.
Hmm I may have misread something in the archive, but will post if I can find it. What I 100% did read though was a Hifi Critic article where they put isolation feet under a Cisco 2960 Personally there’s only so far I’m prepared to go.
Thanks for advising the set-up looks ok - good to know.
I would agree that keeping things simple is the best way forwards, and I wouldn’t daisy chain switch unless you have to.
The argument in favour of the Cisco Catalyst switch applies to the streamer connected directly to it, so it would be wasted if you stick a different one in between.
The current second switch is just daisy-chained for the non-audio stuff (TV, DVD, Apple TV) to hang off it but thanks, I get your point about keeping the streamer directly connected to the Cisco switch and not put another in the chain.
There may be a bottleneck in some cases, but certainly not for music. Naim streamers only run 100MB as that is plenty. Most Catalyst switches (other than the newer GB models) have at least one dual purpose RJ45/SFP port which runs at GB speed, and I use these as ‘uplinks’ with client devices on the regular ports. This is plenty for my needs, and if it ever becomes a bottleneck, swapping out the switch for a fast one is simple.
Catcat,…That in the picture looks good,… Besides… Move your ehternet-cable for TV,etc (Netgear GS205).,from your Cisco to your BT-homehub.
If everything in your music-system is optimally installed,…then you should also experience a little soundquality improvement.
And for those of you who wonder,…Yes,we have tested this.!
Mike_S wrote,…“Isolation feet for a switch huh? I thought I had heard it all…”
Here you have apparently not tested,and lacking experience .
Everything is important,…Think “Attention To Detail”.
We in our group have tested this,…AND YES,… different underlay/feet is important for better soundquality.
But again,…if your music-system is not optimally installed,you will probably hear no difference.
I’ll post a picture later on a couple of cheap rubber feet,that work very well on a particular shelf.
Cisco WS-C2960-8TC-L Catcat,…This above is the one written about for over two years,…thousands of posts and advices.
The one you have with a G,I think is a bit weaker,…maybe Simon can confirm the difference.
This above is the Swedish Harmony-rack with aluminium shelves,…Costs £3500:-.
Here on this Harmony-rack,these small rubber feet above work best under the Cisco,…they cost £3:-for 20 PCs.
Catcat,…That in the picture looks good,… Besides…
Move your ehternet-cable for TV,etc (Netgear GS205).,from your Cisco to your BT-homehub.
Mike_S wrote,…“Isolation feet for a switch huh? I thought I had heard it all…”
.
This above is the Swedish Harmony-rack with aluminium shelves,…Costs £3500:-.
.