I’d been given the same advice from Innuos after I first tried a PhoenixNET and it was a similarly huge step. Hook it up with ChordMusic and it’s stunning
I will try tomorrow again. But when I tried before the PhoenixNet had already 100 hours burn in…so I doubt I will have a significant difference today.
Well, of course it’s different gear. But basically - to try and be as a clear as possible - what I’m doing here is connecting the Innuos to the PN and also connecting the ND555 to the PN - both on OUT ethernet ports.
Was talking about the same Michael, connecting both Melco and Nds to PhoenixNet, instead of Nds to Melco actually.
I thought so, but seeing as my own initial thinking conceived only of
Router → PN → Statement → ND555
or
Router → Statement → PN → ND555
I though it might be helpful to be sure, since
Router → PN
Statement → PN
ND555 → PN
simply hadn’t occurred to me as worth trying 😵💫
I live and learn - hopefully
Interesting Michael. Out of curiosity, which plugging arrangement did/do you use with the EtherRegens?
I went for
Router → ER1
Nucleus+ → ER1 → ER2 —> ND555
but then I didn’t have, for example, a Nucleus with in and out Ethernet ports.
It was the LAN and Streamer ports on the Innuos that got me!
Watching with interest.
For now I have:
Router > PN
Melco > PN
NDS> Melco
Tomorrow I will try again all in PN, like you above.
I am listening now to all connected to PN. I will stay like that for some days and return back to Melco/ Nds direct ethernet after.
I feel the sound is a bit sharper now, with better bass. For now nothing definitive, can’t say which set up I will choose.
I had no patience to wait several days, as I felt a bit less involved with all connection to PN. The direct connection between Melco and Nds, and Melco to PN, gives a more musical presentation to me, with better Prat.
What no blind test
You have my sort of patience with these things it seems - meaning that you know what you like quick.
Although not having PN - I may try it ahead sometime - I do have the same Melco as you and find the sound far more together and happy when fed in a chain from switch → Melco → ND555
Perhaps having the Melco and Streamer doing the same thing as far as jitter from the same port on the switch cascading through also has a positive effect.
Interesting reading all the investigations.
DB.
I feel you are probably right, it must be a cascading effect.
The Phoenix net is well worth a listen. I see our dealer also has some Adot optical network kit to go with the Melco switch, although you have tried that switch, like me, and did not like it. For me the optical kit would have to work miracles.
I also didn’t like the Melco switch. How the PhoenixNet compares to an EtherRegen with external clock is an interesting one. I know both @bailyhill and @MidnightRambler have purchased them (AfterDark and SoTM respectively) and have found a significant improvement in SQ with the addition, possibly bigger than the difference between the EtherRegen with LPS and PhoenixNet, although the latter has the appeal of a lower box count.
I just played it safe, i could have gone for a clock, but good ones are expensive. The Phoenix net has good power supply, good clock and i could borrow from my dealer for as long as i wanted. The Melco i borrowed at the same time, went back next day!
I am interested in the PheonixNET to replace (upgrade) my etherREGEN (with stock wall wart SMPS). However I am conscious that my UnitiServe will eventually conk out (it has already been to Naim hospital twice and it was one of the first 2Tb models from 2012 - so it is not if, but when).
Although the Statement is very expensive, it includes a PhoenixNET within it and is of course a server and ripper all in one box…err…two boxes.
Does anyone have experience of comparing the SQ from a PhoenixNET/attached server vs a Statement. Of course the respective server sections will have an influence but comparing say hi res Qobuz streams would take the server out of the equation, but the SQ associated with the Statement’s server is also of interest.
Update:
I have read a bit more of this thread and note the following:
This would imply that the Statement is not great as a (UPnP) server to the ND555. @Michaelb , could you expand on this reservation, how is the UPnP server ability of the Statement compromised? Is it because you can only use the Statement as a player in USB? Or is it because you have to use the LMS UPnP bridge plugin to connect to the ND555, with the drawbacks @anon91915252 mentioned. @anon91915252, are you saying the Statement is not a great choice as a server to the ND555? I must admit I am at the limits of my understanding here.
BTW, I do not use Room.
NigelB
I think what Michaelb was commenting on is the current limitation of the Innuos Sense app which is currently optimised for connection to devices via USB. Innuos appear to have provided a beta version of Sense which works across Ethernet but as such it is a bit flaky.
Michaelb has also commented that the PhoenixNet box adds a further step up in performance to the Statement, blowing my assumption out of the water that the Statement had all the kit built in and would not benefit from it.
This is now on my list for future consideration, especially if/ when Sense is made fully compatible with Ethernet connectivity. My Innuos/ Etheregen/ NAS are not ideally located at the moment and will remain so whilst I navel gaze in contemplation of a home move later this year/ early next.
Peter
Reading some of the posts again, I can see that now.
It also appears that @Michaelb now connecting up the Statement and PN as recommended by Innuos is a bit of a game changer.
I guess my question to @Michaelb now is, how much is the Statement’s SQ performance (used as a server to the ND555, no Roon) enhanced by the addition of PN? Can you get almost the same performance from the Statement without the addition of the PN?
@Michaelb, would you have the time or interest to try this out?