Innuos Statement - Next-Gen - Phoenix Net

[Yorkshireman]

I guess my original statement “AFAIA the original Statement didn’t have Ethernet isolation/re clocking similar to what the Phoenix Net provides.” is therefore correct.

[frenchrooster]

I guess that Innuos, in the response to @Yorkshireman , would write, if it was the case, that the improved ps in the Statement has a consequence of making the PhoenixNet redundant. I feel that the PhoenixNet is still giving better results than the Ethernet ports inside the improved Statement.

[Michaelb]

Quite possibly, assuming the ports aren’t changed.

But of course the difference is about power supply as much as ports and the Next Gen PS is a very big step up on the original in that and also several ancillary aspects, including vibration isolation of the circuit boards etc.

It’s worth noting that the reply is very clearly limited to existing not Next Gen Statements:

@Yorkshireman

the PhoenixNET does still represent a very decent upgrade to existing STATEMENTs

None of which means that adding the PN might not stil make a big difference - possibly a bigger difference than previously as Blackmorec has suggested above:

@Blackmorec

1. Adding a PN to a Next Gen equipped Statement should bring even greater rewards than adding a PN to a standard Statement. In terms of networking, my experience has been that the better the network gets, the bigger the effect and positive impact of upgrades…

[frenchrooster]

In the Innuos response to Yorkshireman, there are 5 points.
I understood, if I have not misunderstood, that the points 2 to 5 included will still differentiate the PhoenixNet vs Statement 1 and 2. Only the first point, relative to isolation transformers, may change and close the gaps.
But power supply is not all.

[Michaelb]

I think you’re right there, but the only things that really couldn’t change are I suspect 2 and 3, though 2 is new to me and not what I was told in the past, nor what is stated on the website: " Custom-designed Ethernet and USB Reclockers with 3bpp OCXO clocks" - note the plural.

I suppose it comes down to how much of a statement they want the new Next Gen Statement to be, incorporating what they learnt from the original Statement and then built in to the PhoenixNet. Some of it will of course also depend on how much the SQ also benefits from doubling up the clocks, with the PN having its own in a dedicated and separate box.

Hopefully I will be able to let my ears decide soon enough, but it will be interesting to know what Innuos were aiming for and have found.

[frenchrooster]

You will be the only one here to be able to tell us, the difference between PhoenixNet and Statement 2 switch port, as you have them both and will upgrade the Statement.
Maybe Blackmorec too.

[Yorkshireman]

@Michaelb

the question we’re all asking ourselves is how the Statement with the Next Generation power supply upgrades compares to the PhoenixNet where Ethernet reclocking is concerned.

Reply from Innuos to your question bellow:

Question.
“How does the Statement with the Next Generation power supply upgrades compare to the Phoenix Net where Ethernet re clocking is concerned.”

Answer:
“As i say, the Ethernet re-clocking in the STATEMENT will get a lift along with everything else internally from the new power architecture, but the Next-Gen upgrade is much more broad in its scope as it not especially targeted at the Ethernet exclusively. The PhoenixNET is still a much more optimised and purpose-built machine in the context of Ethernet, so if this particular aspect is your primary concern then the PhoenixNET would be the much better choice and consideration.”

[delta]

I have also asked Innuos about that and got the following response:

“ … a streaming-heavy system would still greatly benefit from a PhoenixNET in addition to either version of STATEMENT.”

[Michaelb]

Thanks to you both for doing the legwork there…ò.