Hi Blackmorec, I find you courageous to persevere here in the Naim forum. Most people here don’t believe in an audiophile switch. Other don’t go further than English Electric switch.
The members who have Etheregen with linear ps or PhoenixNet are a minority, maybe 10. Your perseverance is a lost cause.
3 Likes
I had a conversation directly with Gilad Tiefenbrun a few weeks ago when he visited the Bay Area, and I indeed raised the question of the audiophile switches, and he said they were just ‘marginal’.
But as we all know, Linn engineers can have some different understanding, how the system should sound, so if you are happy with yours, then let it be.
Nothing is perfect !!!
1 Like
The same Gilad who doesn’t believe in record cleaning? 
5 Likes
Yes, indeed, he does whatever his dad told him. 
4 Likes
You can ask Naim, DCS, Auralic, Ideon, Burmester, ……They will all respond the same.
3 Likes
Hi Y-B,
Thanks for your reply….I would entirely agree with Gilda Tiefenbrun in that switches are marginal. By far the biggest deal is the power supply that powers those switches. A switch with a poor power supply has minimal effect, while a switch with a world-class supply will sound sublime, the difference being entirely down to the power supply employed. Also, there are switches and there are other switches that stand Worlds apart in terms of their hi-fi related performance. A typical, standard switch offers literally dozens of areas that can be optimized for hi-fi for example by adding any, some or all of the engineering attributes I mentioned in my previous post.
2 Likes
Hi Blackmorec,
I read with interest your journey of discovery on network power supply improvements. In my system I do not have a switch other than the one in the modem/router (Asus DSL-AC88U) as this then feeds direct to my Melco N10. The Melco itself has an isolated mode which always (in my system) sounds better than from the internet. The implication from what you have said is that I might be able to close the gap by using a decent LPS for the modem/router. 19v 3.5A seems a reasonably common size for LPS’s. Have you upgraded the power supply to your modem and were the results noticeable in your system?
1 Like
Hi Mikebu,
I just had an interesting experience with regard to modem power supplies.
That part of my system is:
Virgin Superhub4
TPLink Archer 5400 Tri-band router
Modified TP-Link RE650 as Wi-Fi-Ethernet bridge
AQ-Vox SE Switch etc.
All network modules in my system are powered by DC4 ARC6 supplies with Mundorf Ag/Au cables
When Virgin updated my supply to FTTC they provided a new Superhub 4 modem with a separate wall wart supply and rather unique DC socket that did not allow the use of my separate LPS. It took me a few weeks to sort that out. The downgrade and subsequent upgrade was very clearly heard, but bear in mind that all my downstream power is at the same level. As I stated in my original post, if you follow a good low noise supply with something noisier, you’ll lose a lot of the benefit and the difference you hear will therefore be a lot less. Essentially in a network you should not follow a high spec item with a lower spec item….for best results the network should be a series of improving specifications for example progressively better clocks, better cables, lower noise supplies etc. So what i’m saying is, the level of SQ improvement will depend on the quality of the supply you use for your modem and the quality of all downstream supplies. The better both are, and importantly, the more they progressively improve, the bigger the result you’ll hear.
1 Like
This is true, but I have yet to see consumer oriented so called audiophile switches really address the key network engineering aspects that can be beneficial for audio… for that you need a configurable (‘managed’) commercial grade switch. Current consumer audiophile switches seem to just focus on out of band attributes like common mode noise, and link modulation clock stability … these are not really network related… and more about voltage or signal coupling, as opposed to network processing within the streamer.
It can be worthwhile looking at in my experience especially with network sensitive streamers like the Naim first gen streamers… but perhaps because this requires environmental specific configuration, and the effects are ultimately slight, I suspect it is why it hasn’t caught on for the regular consumer… short of hiring an implementation engineer, it’s not something you can simply throw money at.
Also a quality commercial grade switch can be configured to mitigate or eliminate the issues behind all these posts we see about ‘disappearing in app’… not SQ specific there… but usability. I really would expect a consumer audiophile switch to address this too… but they don’t… they all use very basic and limited chipset functionality.
2 Likes
Totally and utterly agree…I like you found the whole network effect by accident…recently I have replaced the AQvox SE smps with a really good Belleson super regulator at 5v… a really nice upgrade more air space, detail and faster bass…music just sounds more together and less stressed…but very dynamic.
1 Like
Hi Simon,
Thanks for your reply and insights. I would completely agree that a managed switch would be beneficial given the knowledge required to set it up optimally. But with the majority of audiophiles not fully equipped with all the detailed network knowledge a managed switch becomes a double edged sword in the hands of the un- or under-qualified.
I would make the point that while audiophile switches don’t all allow much fiddling (I belong to the unqualified community), so cant be fully adjusted to perfectly match their installation environment, they do fit the vast majority of systems very well and they provide a lot of the engineering attributes I mentioned earlier, so the several switches that I am familiar with have major SQ improvement attributes that adds hugely to the quality of final music. Features that improve power supplies, decrease noise, increase clocking accuracy, screen from EMI, avoid producing internal EMI, reduce cabling, reduce resonance inducing vibration and protect vibration sensitive components, isolate from external vibration, reduce jitter/phase noise, improve isolation of ethernet output etc.
Take Innuos and the PhoenixNET as example, the unit was built from the ground up to provide the maximum sonic benefit and according to dozens of user reviews, it met its brief perfectly without needing to go the managed route.
The problem with commercial switches is that while they may provide the managed environment you mentioned, they indeed don’t make a huge difference because they miss the majority of sonic enhancements listed above.
1 Like
hi - I do agree with your observations -
I guess my irritation is that these are branded as network matters - well in fact they have nothing really to do with the network itself - they are however to do with coupled voltages and clock phase - and would equally apply to SPDIF connections from other digital sources etc.
However get this addressed - then on streamers which are more sensitive to such things then by focussing on the network itself can yield worthwhile improvements - but it is typically not a case of buying a flash glitzy box with a big marketing budget
2 Likes
Hi Simon, well I believe your comments put us in perfect agreement, you representing the network part of the deal and me talking about the signal (data-stream) integrity.
For sure, the network itself has a major role to play, not least its bandwidth, traffic management, inherent latency and a host of other parameters and settings that perform best when harmonised for the entire network and clients.
I think the most important point I would wish to make is that the set-up of the network, the components used to run it and how they are are arranged and used together has as much impact on SQ as the choice of a turntable, arm, cartridge and phone-amp in an analog system.
For a lot of audiophiles, the network is seen as an inconvenient necessity to make music rather than as an integral part of their hi-fi, with huge influence on how the music sounds and the overall impact it makes on listeners.
Many audiophiles using a competently designed, straightforward, network using standard, cheaply available, standard commercial networking products can generate and be rightly satisfied with the high SQ they obtain. There is no obligation to go wild. The only obligation is ‘correctly or optimally designed). But I would point out that further carefully made investments in the network and the production and transport of the data stream can bring major uplifts in SQ, whose value (SQ vs. Cost) often exceeds and sometimes far exceeds the value from upgrading hi-fi components. I believe this aspect of domestic digital hi-fi system development is often neglected, because audiophiles don’t fully realise just how much performance is available by getting the network chain and its integrity (how close it gets to producing the ‘perfect’ data stream specification) just right.
I heard fairly early on what the network could do with a single high quality power supply, and I have continued to upgrade components with a goal of optimizing the whole chain with good quality supplies, cables, vibration control etc. I don’t do this because I want a perfect network. I do it because every single step I take is rewarded with a SQ uplift that is, IMO, worth at least and usually more than the cost (That is, I could not get more uplift for the same money spent elsewhere). So far I’ve found that with progress the improvement steps gradually get more expensive, but also that the SQ uplifts are greater….which is another way to say that so far, I have not found the law of diminishing returns. The better quality the data stream, the better the SQ in terms of its impact on the listener, which can be huge. The other benefit btw is that upgrades become very straightforward given there’s a system architecture with a very predictable outcome.
Time for some music……
2 Likes
For those who do not fully appreciate when the Linn CEO said all the audiophile network switches+PSUs were marginal, it is worth reading how Linn Exakt works:
Exakt-link passes the digital audio data, master clock from the Linn DS/DSM/Hub and power trigger down one CAT-5 ethernet cable to the Exakt loudspeaker, Exaktbox or Urika-II. The digital audio data stream contains information for mulitple audio channels and can be daisy chained through another Exakt products to more loudspeakers, Exaktboxes etc.The master clock is held within the Linn DS/DSM/Hub and makes sure that the music is always on-time/in-tune with every other Exakt loudspeaker.
So the keyword is the streamer’s master clock.
2 Likes
The reason why some owners of the best dacs available today, like MSB select,or DCS Vivaldi, which have top notch isolation from RFI, EMI…still find very worthwhile using audiophile switches with high end linear ps.
There’s the brand recommendations and inner experience.
1 Like
Sure, but if it using Ethernet itself, then there are established protocols for doing this, although for advanced Ethernet timing in commercial/industrial setups… including in music production, one uses PTP. However most consumer network components don’t support PTP you need higher grade commercial, read genuinely expensive network devices, for that.
If one is simply using basic methods like UDP or even TCP to provide real time data, then you can, albeit there are limitations from the network itself of what can be achieved… so one would rely on application level type timing algorithms which would distance themselves from the ability of the network at reduced precision, but increased interoperability. The AES has numerous papers published over the years on synchronous audio distribution over Ethernet for the music industry. For those that don’t know the AES is to the audio industry what the Lancet is to the medical industry.
If one was using just the ‘Ethernet’ cable, but using a proprietary protocol and not using Ethernet at all, although you couldn’t use Ethernet network components, it’s totally up to to you what you could do.
Remember the cable is NOT called Ethernet cable… it is CAT cable… and can be used for many applications, both analogue as well as digital. This is where the bandwidth of the category of the cable can be more relevant and the CAT grade can be more important. With Ethernet it is less so.
But careful not to confuse such things with Ethernet or networking…
1 Like
Hi there Y-B,
When it comes to Linn’s kit and particularly kit with the Exact-link, I would take Linn’s advice, but only after checking for myself. Any oscillator and especially the super-accurate , high stability, low phase noise OCXO variety benefit hugely from ultra-low-noise power supplies. Its also not a trivial matter to distribute clock signal without allowing added noise to reach the master clock’s clients. For me at least, I would take the CEO’s comments as applying to Linn kit only……anything else and YMMV most definitely applies, given the many hundreds of very positive results posted by audiophiles experimenting with switches.
Frankly, there are so many different variations in hardware, topology and implementation within the realm of networking as to make it virtually impossible to make blanket statements when it comes to the resulting sound quality. Given my experiences with networking its highly unlikely that Linn has managed to engineer a system that is entirely immune to all measures that contribute to delivering as close to perfect a data stream as possible. Its just a matter of finding where those potential improvements lie. Accurate timing is important for sure, but its only one of many criteria that influence SQ.
1 Like
One of my favorite Eistein’s quotes: A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
1 Like
I don’t get this. Why would you need something like a Precision Time Protocol to fill a buffer in a streamer. I mean, my NDS has a buffer that contains the ones and zeros that make up a portion of the original music file somewhere on the network. The digital to audio part of the streamer reads this buffer and uses it’s own clock to transfer this digital file to an analog audio signal. It’s this clock that determines how good this analog signal is (apart from the DAC and all the analog circuits in the NDS). 44.1 kHz for CD or 48 khz or multiples of this for HiRes files.
What does it matter with what rate the buffer is filled? Heck,I could type the zeros and ones in myself,as long as this buffer does not run empty, who cares. What am I missing here? Yes,I know there can be all sorts of electric noise etc, but just focus on network clock timing. Why would that be essential in a buffered system?
3 Likes
I have no idea and very much hope that someone who does replies.
I wouldn’t in any case say “essential”, but I suppose the clock must be in the DAC for a reason and maybe it just helps giving it less work to do, because the stream has already been reclocked.
All I can really say, however, is that every switch change I have made which provides superior clocking (Netgear → Cisco Catalyst → EtherRegen → PhoenixNet) made an impressive difference. I am not surprised, therefore, by reports from people who have added separate OCXO clocks to, for example, an EtherRegen and found similar improvements. Also, I’m not saying the clock is all there is to these products nor can I justify believing that it makes a big contribution…
So I’d love a reply that understands what is going on here… I was very surprised to find that practically everything in the chain impacts the SQ result of streaming, but that is indeed what I’ve found.
3 Likes