Can fiber improve vs lan cable

Streaming Audio
61

FR… perhaps this might help…

There are different fibre transmission types such as
SX : short wavelength multimode
LX: long wavelength single mode
Etc
LX is suited for longer distances, SX ideal for shorter lengths.

There are fibre types OM1 through OM4 … this is like fibre equivalence of twisted pair Cat Number.

There is the fibre connection types such as
LC: Lucent connector
SC: Standard connector
Plus many more

There are the link options of either duplex (send and receive fibres) or simplex (single fibre)

Finally there is the transceiver type such GBIC, SFP or SFP+

There appear an array of options, as fibre is used in a range of IT environments, and major IT manufacturers such as Cisco support many options to support many environments.

So in our application for home networks we can narrow it down a bit.

First the device connecting the fibre may only support a certain mode or connector type or specific SFP transceiver module types…

Typically we will have SFP transceivers that support duplex SX or LX fibre transmission using OM1 or OM2 fibre with often LC connectors at 1Gbps.

The key thing is what the transceiver or SFP supports, and both ends need to be the same type. There are some considerations with IT grade components on minimum lengths and maximum lengths for reliability. SX (Multi mode) is designed for shorter distances, ie typically where you could otherwise use a twisted pair cable. But LX can also be used in some shorter distance cases, but specific SFP/fibre matching or optical attenuators may be required, so generally SX would be recommended for home network use rather than LX.

As far as the network operation, the fibre transmission type and fibre type is transparent and makes no difference.

Hopefully this of some help, the key thing here is both ends of the fibre link need to use the same transceiver type. (Edit as per Chris’s comments below… same type, but not necessarily same vendor)

Oh yes the other thing, unlike TOSLINK, Ethernet fibre can be dangerous. Never look into the end of an active fibre, it may damage your sight. Network fibre needs to be treated with care.

5 Likes
62

Great summary, Simon. I would just add, in case there’s any confusion, that the ‘same type’ of SFP at each end does not mean the exact same model, as that must be compatible with the device in which it runs. Rather, that they should both be SX, for example, in order to work together.

1 Like
63

First - my bias was toward wanting it to be better and to prefer it, as it would allow me to tidy my installation. But I always listen to end-result.

Briefly: The Optical connected by fibre ER and Electrical connected by Ethernet cable sound different. The Optical sounded a bit cleaner and a little faster, which was good - but it also sounded less involving. Further listening had me realizing there was a bit less low-level information now - just less being resolved and hence it was ‘lacking’ substance.

Why - no idea but could be many things, like noise and jitter added-in that lowered the resolution threshold the ND555 could attain. I ‘know’ it should make no difference - etc… - but it did and was worse, so I parked that method of connection for another time - perhaps with a different (and better) optical to electrical transduction module than what the one into the ER allowed for.

In context of my system and me - it was not taking me along a fruitful path but making things a little worse, so I sadly decided to retain the electrical Ethernet connection - which presently sounds excellent.

I also experimented with the earth-strap as there was a HF noise effect too with the removal of the Ethernet and using optical that seemed to also cause a problem - it was just becoming a can of worms more than I wanted at the time - and I already had a good working solution without Optical, so laziness won! :bear:

DB.

1 Like
64

It makes sense that optical might not sound better or might well even sound worse in the sense that running copper from router to Cisco then converting to optical signals along fibre to ER then converting back to copper Ethernet to the Streamer is a complex basis for a LAN signal chain.

Damage to timing and noise can be added at each conversion point, and between them.

So it seems unlikely that the benefits of electrical isolation from an optical Link would be great enough to overcome those downsides.

But worth trying.

Some on other forums have claimed it worked for them.

But as a design it seems unlikely to work well unless the streamer has an optical input socket/sfp.

Then one could use the A side socket as an optical output.

65

I think it could work better - or not, depending on the balance of the performance parameters achieved in either implementation and their impact on the end-system. I did not know and to be fair I was hoping for an improvement - a cheap one at that compared to purchasing very expensive Ethernet cables which - again - should not make a difference but I was finding actually did.

So it was an attempt by me to save money, get a better solution and learn something - I only achieved the last part. :frowning_face: But not the ‘why’ of it - just that it was not a quick and simple upgrade. If you don’t listen to it then it is that! :slightly_smiling_face:

I have some ideas on what is going on now in terms of the actual circuits operating rather than the idealized functional circuits that are usually considered. If the latter are considered then none of this makes any sense and there is no difference possible - but if you look at how signals propagate along transmission lines and what happens at the ‘ends’ then it is possible to see how noise may enter into things in ways you did not want to consider. For a normal commercial application it does not matter - it just ‘works’, but when you are adding noise anywhere near the D to A circuitry via indirect HF and RF pathways then it is just difficult to totally isolate things to make things immune to influence.

…but these are just my musings on it. I don’t know why, but I have experienced that such things can happen and they are very difficult to measure when the resolution on the measuring instrument is less that the capability of the D to A conversion in the DAC/Streamer itself.

It is why I limit myself to trying and reporting what happens.

DB.

66

Yes, I should try.

But I have a lot on and lists of jobs.

I’d like to try Audirvana.

Also I read several posts elsewhere where people do really talk about optical links sounding rotten when first installed, and later sounding better than copper ones!

No kidding.

I had not expected to find that for a cable where I thought the electrochemical interactions of the current and the dialectic and the copper were removed.

And my system is also singing at the moment.

So I can’t imagine installing an optical cable and waiting for it to sound great 10 days later.

I am very happy just playing music at the moment, shocking though that is to admit.

67

Jim, I wouldn’t worry about damage to timing… any frame timing will stay essentially the same. If there is anything there could be a small serialisation delay… which is effectively an offset or constant latency … but this won’t affect interframe timing. All this happens at the physical and link protocol layers which is below and separate from the end to end transport flow layer and protocols such as TCP used for transferring media to streamers etc.

All in all fibre can work very well with short distances, and is obviously a must on longer distances where twisted pair is not appropriate. Fibre does have the advantage of full electrical isolation which can be important and beneficial in some scenarios including possibly audio streaming.

However I do say using fibre blind is not a great idea… in my experience bad fibre connectors and patch leads are more common than with twisted pair, so on a fresh install I would always recommend where you can check the frame quality counters. You might only be able to do in one direction if connecting to consumer equipment, but that is better than no checks.
If the frame quality counters remain at 0 after the first few days of use… then you are good and you can leave it and forget about it. If you see errors creeping up then it needs investigating and or replacing.
Remember errors won’t necessarily stop the link from working… those network protocols are there to recover errors… but it might mean your streamer is working harder than it needs to… and just like for many there is an audible shift between FLAC and WAV, there may be subtle audible shift if the streamer is having to error recover.

This can all get a bit like guess work when things don’t sound as expected, there are zillions of possibilities … hence why it’s good to check and validate it’s not the obvious ones. A Catalyst switch will allow you to check the quality of all twisted pair and optical ports.

1 Like
68

How can you check the operation of the Cisco ports?

Can you open a Cisco site and look up your own switches?

69

You log onto the switch using telnet, SSH, or web interface if setup and use the command.

Show interface <interface type/number>

When a network device is called ‘managed’ it usually means it provides diagnostics as well as being configurable.

Here is the Port interface stats to my streamer … as you can see no errors here at all.

image
image1607×560 279 KB

70

Thanks Simon.

Would be interesting to check this.

But will it ever reach the top of my work stack?

71

Now there is a question :grinning:

72

Thanks Simon,
That’s the best summary that I’ve seen. Very helpful for anyone looking to incorporate a fibre optic link in their network chain.

Best regards, BF

2 Likes
73

Ordered a Sonore opticalRendu yesterday. Got a great price on a demo unit of the ROON only model (it only has the RAAT app on it) with one of their inexpensive power supplies and 10Gtek FMC all in for $750. It will mean I have to hang onto the microRendu in order to run the UPNP Bridge app for Roon to go to the UQ, but I can just hang that off a patch cable and power it with the LPS coming with the oR (I already have their much better Sonore LPS).

So anyway, sometime next week I’ll be able to let the community know my impressions of an opticalModule into an oR and my V1/160. I probably won’t be able to hang it off the back of the V1 with the very good Uptone USPCB like I do the credit card sized mR, but I have an Atlas Hyper USB cable hanging around so that will have to be my go to for now. Not sure if I want to get into USB cables - it always seems in this crazy hobby that you finish one can of worms only to see another open right away!

2 Likes
74

image
image3481×2500 2.3 MB

Sonore Optical Module

The rest of the kit is on its way (SFP modules, OF cable and LPS)

2 Likes
75

There may be some wobbles in SQ in the first few days.

76

If it makes any difference, at all :wink:

We’ll see. My experience with networks, and I have some, is that complexity can bring new problems.

But if things get better I’ll certainly report that :smiley:

I really have no expectations.

Have you tried one of those Sonore oM?

77

Yes, each extra link in the chain is chance to make SQ worse in various ways as well as better.

Not least, just plugging another item into the house electricity circuits - and also making the audio signals travel through more sets of cables and circuitboards and connectors.

Good luck with it.

I have an EtherRegen, and am aiming to get a better psu for it too.

I tested it again yesterday by taking it out of the chain, and it does make a positive difference to SQ, and is a keeper in my system.

1 Like
78

I won’t place the Sonore OM between my Cat. 3560 and the ND555 immediately.
I’ll use it connected to my main computer.

There’ll be a lot of traffic to monitor . That’s the cool thing about the cat. 3560 .

I don’t get the burn in thing on network components. It doesn’t make much sense to me…

But I’m not stubborn, I’ll leave the Sonore oM for 2 weeks “burn in” before connecting it to the ND555 :innocent:

1 Like
80

The oM does burn in a bit - it’s not the fiber of course, but the linear regulators and clock. But you should notice an uplift right off the bat (in front your ND555). Best practice is to not plug the upstream and downstream devices on the same circuit, and the nearest one not on the same circuit as the hifi.

I’ll have my opticalRendu on Friday which is really the end game as far as the oM is concerned, at least according to Sonore and users over on AS. Cant wait…

81

So what if someone is using a hydra system of power cables?
Should they plug in the last oM (or their ER) using one of the hydra IEC leads, or not?