Guys you need to try and use PoE powered Cisco switch… I did for a while with my NDX it seemed possibly to have the slight edge over an internally powered switch… it was certainly a lot neater… of course it could also have been the benefit of having one less mains lead about.
I believed Nigel’s question was specific to BJC Cat6 & 6A, which is how I answered it
Hi Nigel.
Just out of curiosity, may I ask, what lengths did you go for?
Many thanks
Just to clarify - in that case there is no psu in the switch, and the electricity to run the switch comes along the same ethernet cable as the signal?
So the tradeoff is - now you save on EM noise coming from the internal psu, but you have added em noise from the extra flow of electricity in the cable?
Or is the electricity already there along with the signal?
And IIRC you said that these switches have EEE in the name or in the spec?
And they include the new Cisco Catalyst 2960 X series?
And will they automatically switch to PoE or do you have to program them to switch to it?
1 Like
7m, 3m, 2 x 2m, 0.75m.
1 Like
So PoE (Power over Ethernet) is addressed by specific Ethernet standards that enable connected devices to be powered via the Ethernet lead. This can work when the source device, typically a special PoE source switch or a power injector, supports PoE technology and can act as the power source.
Now PoE loads typically include small low powered Ethernet devices like surveillance cameras, IP phones, Wifi access points and small switches… and here there are a few 8 port 2960 models that can be powered this way.
When you power a device such as a small 2960 switch this way then you are removing the local mains power-supply from the switch and powering it by a remote connected switch or power injector that sends 44 to 57 volts DC along the Ethernet cable. (Depending on standards and implementation supported). DC itself doesn’t cause EM interference.
However most switches irrespective of how they are primarily powered still use DC to DC converters inside… this is a type of SMPS designed for DC and provides the appropriate voltages for Ethernet and the switch logic,
EEE is something else… this is another standard that focuses on reducing Ethernet power consumption which amongst other things reduces the serial switch voltages on the twisted pairs for short link lengths thereby reducing power consumption. I believe all the new 2960 models support this and have enabled as default.
2 Likes
I see, i’m teetering on 3 X 2m but I guess it doesn’t really matter as all my gear is local. I’m still dithering mind, I can’t see it being as good as or bettering AQ Vodka. Anyway thanks!
thanks Simon
Two obvious follow up Qs that anyone wishing to try this will ask are:
- Can my specific Cisco 2960 take PoE?
- What injector is likely to work best, and be good value?
There is a Q&A on PoE here: https://community.fs.com/blog/what-is-poe-injector-how-to-use-it.html
One can buy one of these for £20ish: TP-LINK TL-PoE150S PoE Injector Adapter with IEEE 802.3af Compliant - Black
But TP Link is I think very cheaply made low quality kit.
And then the splitter needs to be plugged in to the mains ring and added into the ethernet chain…e.g. like this?
1 Like
Hi… so any Cisco catalyst switch with the letters ‘PD’ in the title description means it’s a PoE PoweredDevice compatible. These are I believe limited to the 8 port variant. The powered link needs to go to one of the two uplink ports.
As far as injectors, the key thing to look for is compliance to at least the 802.3af specification… this should then allow connectivity to compliant PD devices such as a 2960 PD switch.
The D link device referenced seems to be 802.3af compliant … should be ok. However the quality of its PSU may have bearing on any benefit it may bring… but it may be a case of trial and error. I use Cisco switch PoE power sources.
You clearly don’t use a splitter with a PD compatible device, instead the 802.3af compliant powered link from the injector goes to one of the Cisco 2960 PD switch’s uplink ports.
Thanks Simon - that’s very useful and clear.
cheers
Jim
I’ll try and compile my own findings comparing Vodka, Wireworld Starlight, Sablon, BJC and DesignaCable - scattered through the ND555 Impression thread - all in one place here as soon as I have a little spare time. Also tested the Supra Cat8 over several weeks here. Still came away preferring the Belden CatSnake from DesignaCable.
4 Likes
@Peter1480,…Thanks,.interesting.
I got a thought when I saw the picture. Returns when I have more time.
/Peder🙂
The BJC Cat-6 ( 6 feet = 1.8m) has arrived & is installed (as intended) between BT HH6 wireless hub & Cisco SG110D switch. The cable it’s replacing is a Cat-6 made by Lindy, a German cmpy, but I suspect it’s a far east product.
First impressions with the BJC playing iRadio (Paradise & Naim) is that SQ has change a tiny bit, it sounds more open, with better definition & detail.
Due to time constraints today, I intend to run it for 24 hrs on iRadio running continuous (muted). Tomorrow I will take it out & jerry rig between switch & NDX to test how it sounds against MeiCord Cat-6 & on local (NAS) streaming.
3 Likes
As Simon said, the TPLink are quite good units especially at the price but let down a bit by a crappy psu.
When I fitted my TPLink FMC I tried a different psu and it made a noticeable difference. In the end I dropped the £50 for a IFI psu which was better again. You may find that worthwhile, as always it’s your choice.
1 Like
@Peter1480,…Hello again 
,.my idea is,if you look at the pictures below.
Naim isolates its passive-filters from the vibration of the speaker,.which you see on the first picture below,with a rubber-gasket/O-Ring between the filter-box and the Speaker-box.
Some users simply remove the filter-box from the speaker,.and mount it on the wall or a tripod instead.
It actually gives better soundquality.
The two pictures of rubber-rings are just as an example,.they are not Naim original.
You now understand my idea,.your Cisco is firmly mounted in the bracket…and also the bracket to the wall.
If we put the rubber-rings/O-rings between the bracket Cisco/Wall.
It can get better,.and it’s so cheap to try so it affects no poor 
.
In our various tests,.we have also found that this Cisco is as sensitive to positioning,.vibration and different powercables as all other Hifi-electronics boxes.
And,.according to you,your location of your Cisco on the wall has already given you better soundquality…Instead of having it in a hifi-rack.
This was an idea I got when I saw your picture. We shall test this,.it would be fun if you also do it,then we can later compare our results.
On the last picture (which I also added in earlier),.these small cheap rubber-feet give better soundquality.
So this can also get better,.we get the answer to that further ahead.
Thank you for presenting this idea.
/Peder🙂
Up and running with my new BJ cables this evening (2m black). Do they sound better then my previous Designacable and Meicord? Can’t really tell to be honest as I’m not great at detecting subtle changes after a switchover but they do sound very good in their own right so they’ll be left in and forgotten about. Designacable has been relegated to TV duties and I’ll keep the Meicord as a spare as it’s a nice cable.
2 Likes
@BertBird,…Interested to hear,.do you still test AQ Diamond.?
Our comparison between AQ Diamond 0,75m vs. 1,5m is currently…
• 1,5m has been connected 47 days.
• 0,75m in 7 days.
The difference between them has fallen even more,.there is now no big difference.
But so far,.1,5m is still slightly better.
/Peder🙂
Peder, having once described to an audiophile friend why a meter of cable at £500 sounded better than a standard kettle cable, I know I’m off my head!
So I raided the leftover bits draw, these are those magic little rubber things, forged in the hearths of Asdgard and sprinkled with pixie dust, that you put under sand mounted speakers etc . They actually work quite well in that situation.
An hours worth of listening before. Some hanging upside down and they are installed…
……and an another hour replay with the Peder Patent Damping Solution in place…there may be bit of a difference, the jury is out.
My wife says “they are coming to take me away”…
1 Like
That’s not going to work as the rigidity of the screw is bypassing the compliance and damping of the rubber. This is what you need:
I’ve got feet the same as that stuck directly to the base of my Cisco.