They exist already…
Point of correction, Brighton beach isn’t sandy.
2 Likes
I can second that.
I’m intrigued. A question for those that have tried it (with +ve results).
Many here run setups that cost more than my house (really!) Do you think the benefits would still be there with a more modest setup.
Thank you for that, Simon. I’m a little wiser now. My conclusion is that my Cisco isn’t particularly lacking. This is all something of a minefield - for example if one was to trial just one of these switches, would it be the EE or the UR? - but it is of course a minefield that can simply not be entered.
EE or UR, from what I have seen they appear to be a much of a muchness … they are basic LAN switch devices with upgraded clocks, and single voltage linear power supplies…and a solid case with possibly some physical mechanical isolation. They might be worth considering if you must position very close to your audio equipment, as opposed to keeping your switches and router well away, which is what I would recommend anyway… especially as the Cisco devices do appear to be slightly microphonic.
I guess my concern as I have put in other posts, is that they don’t appear to optimise the Ethernet segment for your streamer like say the Cisco Catalyst devices do by default… they seem to focus on serial line clock noise, and possibly ground plane/mechanical noise … worthwhile but there are many other considerations.
1 Like
Thanks Simon, that’s a useful summary, though not one that EE or UR are likely to use in their marketing. I’ve not tried these and am not taking a view on their efficacy, but their marketing would seem highly likely to give a significant reading on the bullshit detector.
3 Likes
The thing is some folks here have gone from a Cisco to an EE and have claimed it’s better and worth the change, regardless of the marketing guff. Unless one actually tries one in their own system it’s all just speculation which is just as worthless.
4 Likes
This is true, but the environment is key… such as how close the switch is to your audio.
The Cisco Catalyst devices do appear to be microphonic… so if you close or near to your speakers you may be hampering them, and these little audiophile devices may be better suited to putting your equipment rack etc…
However as I advise keeping network equipment away from your audio equipment and some distance (at least in terms of Ethernet lead) you might find the Catalysts have the edge, especially on a typically busy home network with severeal active multicast groups.
There really are too many variables, and to totally rely on trial and error seems, in my opinion, completely in appropriate . You should know it capabilities and then assess, otherwise what might sound good now, in a few months may sound poor when you add some new home automation products to your LAN.
Think of of unmanaged group and broadcast data like noisy SMPS on your mains radial or ring… you would normally try and avoid or create a new radial… a new radial is the equivalent of an IGMP snooped segment.
In my humblest of opinions I do feel much of the marketing of these products is aimed at people who don’t really know how our digital systems work and use our home network resources.
5 Likes
The ER was significantly better than the Cisco with separate power supply in my system, transformational for big orchestral works when powered by a big LPS. God alone knows how much better it will be with a flash external master clock if I can be bothered to find the cash and make the space.
How the differences would scale down in less simpler systems than my own ND555, 2x555DR PS, 552, 500 I have no idea. Maybe @MidnightRambler can comment, having a range of streaming systems from Statement to Atom, if I remember correctly.
4 Likes
In my experience the EtherRegen is a less fussy than the Catalyst but not much… But I can’t envisage any setup in which the Catalyst would have the edge. In my system both are/were on the end of a 5m Ethernet cable away from the Fraim racks.
1 Like
Which Catalyst model were you using using and how was it powered. I use a cisco WS-C3560-8PC (PowerPC405) processor running 12.2(55)SE11 on a wooden ground platform with some suspension… I have also found PoE 2960 good as well.
I keep at least 5 m long Ethernet leads for best SQ.
Ahh yes, and perhaps important, for best SQ I decouple my DAC from my streamer.
Maybe you’re right and let’s face it we all fall under that category to some extent or another. At the end of the day the technical jargon means diddly squat, if it sounds better then it does. You don’t need to how things work. One could have all the knowledge in the world but if they suffer from hearing problems as opposed to someone who doesn’t and no knowledge, who’s in the better position to form such a judgment?
3 Likes
I was using 2 x 2960PD, a nice step up both singly and obviously daisy chained compared with the previous a 2960 G.
I totally agree, however I can’t help feeling that this is exploited in the marketing of such things… it would be better in my opinion not to lead on such statements if your target audience is going to be bamboozled by it and think it’s something it isn’t… to be fair even this forum shows some evidence of that by members which I think is unfair on them.
One example is that there is often a focus with such devices on the word ‘jitter’. This is unusual and not normally want you would use to describe switch clock stability and serialisation of bit flows in networks… however it’s used because of the association with audiophiles of completely unrelated sample stream jitter feeding a DAC… so in my opinion it plays on that…
I also very much agree, if you like how something sounds or performs then use it… my concern as I said above because of these devices apparent basic and limited capabilities, they may well be vulnerable to future changes on your LAN, long after your trial period is finished.
And what firmware? And Ethernet length…
Out of interest how did you connect the switches? I have other traffic on my service switch to distribution switch, and I found on my first gen streamer that 2x etherchannel everso slightly helped as well. Hear no benefit on the NP800 based streamers however.
Also did you set your streamer facing ports to PortFast, to avoid redundant loop detection traffic and speed up the time for the port to come active… probably not a huge amount if any on SQ but helps usability.
I am going to try an EE switch in due course to form my own opinion. If i like it it will most certainly stay. Ironically (i know, i got caught in all the madness), i have four Cisco switches here being unused. I prefer the wifi. I think it sounds better. I find the Ciscos smooth things off too much and bloat the bass. If the EE switch stays neutral and helps my ND5 XS 2 keep true to form, it’ll be a keeper.
1 Like
5m Ethernet. I can’t remember which firmware, l’m afraid.
I am yet to be convinced to jump on this bandwagon, and am reading the feedback with interest. Per the comment from @james_n the silent angel switch does look remarkably similar, even the same power requirement as the EE.
Its cheaper at £395 from mcru, with 30 day return policy. You might want to take a look before jumping at the EE. Perhaps others can comment on the silent angel SQ?
4 Likes