I kind of doubt it… the devices complain if they have a fault issue as they have many diagnostics … and would typically stop working in some way if there was a fault… like a port not working, or complete failure to boot from a memory or a PSU failure.
These are relatively simple devices, and most here are not using the more advanced functions of why you would really use such a switch instead of a cheap Netgear… Finally the sound improvement for most is not down to the tested data functionality.
I deal with literally thousands of these devices out in the field, and I don’t think we have ever had a failure or fault… apart from one which was destroyed with a lightning surge.
Larger devices have PSU failures or system board failures…But typically that is either a hard down or major fault scenario.
Ahh, but there are different sorts of computer… as you say Babbage theorised on the analytical computer… his equivalent was Alan Turing for theorising the programmable computer, inspired by challenges of mathematical logic described by Max Newman. Separately there was a thought by Konrad Zuse for electro mechanically storing machine instructions in with data storage… These are fundamental abstractions from Turing and Zuse that we all take for granted now in computer and IT… but it was completely alien 100 years ago.
It was one thing theorising, it was another thing actually building, and this is where Tommy Flowers came in. A British engineer who designed and built the first electronic digital programmable computer initially with GPO and his own private funding, and then Government wartime funding. Flowers applied the Turing theories to a machine architecture built from some of from early digital automatic telephone switching and telegraphy encoding techniques. These early creations eventually became the much celebrated Colussus used for code cracking in the Second World War.
Zuse had also taken the Turing principles but had focussed down a slightly different electro mechanical computer path, as opposed to the electronic digital computer path of Tommy Flowers.
In the US Von Neumann developed his modern day digital computing principles in part based on Turing’s work, but also independently.
The ideas from Turing and Flower’s work also helped feed the US ENIAC project which Von Neumann was principally involved with, which addressed creating a programmable computer to assist the development of the atomic bomb.
Unfortunately after the Second World War, just about all the UK efforts and designs were destroyed and declared official secrets, and effectively that path came to an abrupt end… and the nascent British digital computing community had to transfer to the US path and the Von Neumann model. Manchester University and University of London built the first two UK Von Neumann computers in 1948, (Manchester Baby and ARC2) and the UK NPL tried to startup the UK momentum again that had been destroyed by the UK government after the Second World War but arguably it was too late in a fast moving world.
Interesting to speculate that if the German war authorities and no doubt Hitler had decided to focus on Zuse’s technology, as the British authorities and Churchill had decided to do with Turing and Flowers, and if the UK authorities had not destroyed the UK designs and developments after the Second World War and declared official secret our current day computers could be somewhat different.
I recently watched Benedict Cumberbatch deliver a riveting performance as Alan Turing in The Imitation Game. If you haven’t seen it, I’d highly recommend it.
Indeed it was an entertaining film, if by all accounts not very accurate… at least on the Colussus development side… and I can’t remember Tommy Flowers who designed, built and wrestled with the very early reliability being portrayed … but hey it’s only a drama 
I find Paul Gannon’s book, Colussus, Bletchley Park’s Last Secret really good… it describes the history of telegraphic code breaking, and the political wrangles, infighting and engineering challenges in a very tense and threatened world leading upto the creation of Colussus, and all it’s pre processors.
Yesterday I tried to take one of the Sonore opticalModule fiber media converters out of the chain by going direct from the SFP of my Cisco 2960 to the receiving optiocalModule before the streamer. Still sounded lovely and detailed, but missing bass and fullness. tried back and forth a couple of times, and the transmitting opticalModule always brings back the full sound.
Some talk on here of going from switch to switch for improvements - in some ways this is a bit like going through these fiber convertors (the Sonore’s being of high quality with Crystal clock and linear power regulators and powered by linear power supplies). The switch to switch (and so on) has been discussed over on the computer audio forum, and some members hear improvements doing so, and in non-technical language it’s down to reclocking and the PHY layers and each subsequent leap cleaning up the noise a bit more.
My next move is definitely a Sonore opticalRendu - apparently going from opticalModule (not switch SFP) direct into the Rendu is the key to hearing big improvements over the previous Rendu models. I’d be interested to hear from other members and their fiber experiments.
Just curious, did you tried the optical module vs SFP on Cisco to optical rendu?
Thanks. Unfortunately the opticalRendu is going to have to wait a bit (just bought a new Nikon lens yesterday and have my eye on a Profoto A1 flash) but not having an issue with brightness or glare (the 1.4 upgrade and the Sonore linear power supply seemingly took care of that).
Yeah, it’s amazing the number of boxes one can end up with. Makes me shake my head as well and lust for a true all-in-one. In my case, whenever an upgrade is made so far I’m able to shuffle a lot of it down the line and/or to the office system. And when the internet goes down, I still have a turntable in reserve (no cd player though unless one counts an old Oppo BD player).
Just installed by Cisco 2960 Switch. Have put the ethernet from the router in no.1 and the output to the NDX2 in no.2. Is this right? Should i spread them out? Miraculously the sound seems to have improved. Maybe its the placebo effect, but it does sound different, was beyond sceptical. Will give it more time before I give my full judgement.
So the question I wanted to ask. Shall I leave my Amazon Fire TV, Smart TV (other ethernet electronics) connected directly to the router? Or are they okay being inserted into the Cisco switch as well? Or shall I leave the Cisco switch solely for my NDX2?
Thanks in advance.
Now i need to figure out how to tidy this up!! 
May have to put the Cisco Switch on the wall somehow (if anyone has any experience please let me know), is currently sat on top of the perspectives box which covers my turntable…
Yes I understand completely. Too many boxes is not ideal aesthetically or probably for sound. More it’s simple and straight, the better it is generally.
The problem is also that there are so many possibilities today : Server to dac in usb or spdif, streaming dac and server in UPNP, dac with streaming bridge, …
Technologies are evolving fast… Not easy to take the right choice .
However in your case, it would be interesting to compare the optical rendu with DCS bridge. The advantage is only one box for the dcs.
The most boxes I have seen were on @MrUnderhill. System. Lot of FMC, linear ps…I wonder if @MrUnderhill has simplified or not his system today.
You should try yourself. @Simon-in-Suffolk will respond that you can use the Cisco for all. But some prefer to have only the hifi on the Cisco.
Well, just for the heck of it, and because I have all the pieces sitting here, in the office I just inserted a TP-Link fiber convertor with 5v iFi power supply, in front of the old Cisco. So now going 2960L-16>fiber via SFP>TP-Link FMC> Melcord opal RJ45>Cisco 2960-8tc>BJC Cat6> Naim Unitiqute. Subtle change but sounds fuller, more presence. I don’t think the SFP connections are in the Cisco’s are as good compared to stand alone FMC’s (and esp the Sonore opticalModule). But it could also be the reclocking and reclocking again that’s making the sound fuller. Interesting times…
Hi FR,
Yes - LOTS.
I did enjoy the journey, which was interesting, but it was a bit of an epiphany when I tried a dCS NB and it was as good as my myriad of boxes and cables; if rather more expensive!
I then tried a Linn Klimax DS/1 renew and thoroughly enjoyed it.
I DID enjoy my Audionote DAC, which is boxed up in the loft. IF a dCS NB comes up at a bargain price I will probably buy it and break out the AN again.
In the meanwhile I have been very happily listening to LOTS of music via the Linn.
M
I have a question, do cables that have been run in need to be run in again? I’m under the impression they do not so once cables are run in I can swap back and forth and should hear them at their best immediately. Is this the case?
I added BJC cat 6a to my 2960/SU and 2960/QNAP. Since they are new they had a brighter sound than the already run in BJC cat 6 they replaced. Not wanting to go through all that again I swapped the BJC cat 6 back to the 2960/SU and put the BJC cat 6a b/w the modem and router thinking I’ll let the cat 6a run in there until it’s properly run in. Does that make sense?
Even with the already run in cat 6 back on the 2960/SU the sound was good but not as good as having both BJC cat 6 on 2960/SU and 2960/QNAP. I stream a lot from the minim server on the QNAP so I suspect having the fresh BJC cat 6a on 2960/QNAP is making a difference there.
Having been running in for a few days now I’m hearing a return to that warm dynamic sound I had previously. My hunch is there is no significant difference b/w the BJC cat 6 and cat 6a but I’ll wait until they’re fully run in before judging.
I’ll likely end up keeping the BJC cat 6a at modem/router and add the other BJC cat 6a to the router/2960 which is currently a BJC cat 6. But I’ll test the converse for good measure.
You can use any of the RJ45 ports on a 2960, and it doesn’t matter which one is used for which device. (Except for the blue Console port, which is only for configuration.)
Most of them have one or two dual-purpose ports on the R end. These are normally GB ports, whereas others are only 10/100 on many models, so if you have a device that would benefit from the greater speeds, you can use those faster posts. For a streamer, 100Mb is plenty.
The switch closest to my streamer only occasionally has other devices connected to it. When I have had other things connected to it, I have never noticed any degradation in sound quality, so I would just use whatever ports are most convenient. I would be more concerned about other devices (routers, TV stuff, etc.) causing problems if they were on the same mains circuit, especially if connected to the same wall socket, and if you can give your HiFi its own dedicated mains supply, I would recommend doing it.
As for wall mounting, it shouldn’t be a problem. One of mine is mounted on flat on the wall at the back of a cupboard, which is too shallow to allow it to sit flat. Cisco say that if you do this, the ports should be facing downwards, but that wouldn’t be possible in my case, so I put them facing upwards. 2 years later, it hasn’t blown up yet!
This with Two Switches for Music
@Darkebear, @Xanthe,…You both have described what cable you have between Switch 1 and Switch 2.
But do you think,.or even more interesting,have you tried,.if the cable between Switch 1 and Switch 2 has any significance.
I am convinced that it has significance,.the question is just how big.
/Peder🙂
You wonder if a second diamond will have to be bought if two Cisco sound better than one ?
Yes the all HiFi equipment is plugged in a few meters away and has its own plugs for each device (mains supply). The Cisco switch is on an extension lead though from another mains socket further away, with TV, Router, Amazon Fire TV, Turntable all running off that… its a bit overcrowded but can really see away around that due to the setup, hope its okay…
Where did you purchase your wall mount from? Cant seem to see any on Fleabay. Thanks for your help, really appreciate it!
Also I have a powerline lite lying around, would this be better than cisco switch plug? Or is that just daft thinking?
@frenchrooster,…You Got The Point 
.!!
We shall test this tomorrow with my Cableoholic-friend.
He has two Cisco 2960 from 2011,.which sounds exactly the same.
This we have tested before.
Therefore,.I asked the question to Xanthe and Darkebear.
/Peder🙂