Thank you gentlemen, and apologies to the OP for the diversion.
I wonder if @Jason might consider opening a new thread to air his views on the ADOT kit, now he has resolved his problem, and @james_n might elaborate on how the ADOT improved SQ in his system.
I am wondering if optical isolation in domestic audio applications is starting to come of age.
No need to apologise!
My original questions have been answered and so I’m very happy for the thread to diverge.
Thank you.
It is still probably a good idea to start a new thread as those interested in optical isolation might miss the discussion.
Well it’s been around for long enough. Naim streamers have always had optical isolators in them, which I suppose begs the question, why do you need another one on your network?!
Yes, I did beg the question earlier, whether or not the superior isolation the ND555 offers would benefit from that offered by the ADOT.
@Jason has a NDS and @james_n has a NDX2, and both seem to appreciate what the ADOT brings in terms of additional noise isolation and how that enhances SQ. So maybe the ADOT does offer something to those using Naim streamers.
The usual advice to demo at home holds true here in spades.
I’m not sure if the later streamers still use opto isolation which only seemed to be between the ARM microcontroller and the DSP section in the earlier (NDX/NDS era) players.
Perhaps the question should be if the ND555 provides superior isolation, then why have you got the ER and various flavours of Ethernet cables as they should make minimal to no difference ? 
Having read up on what the ER is supposed to do, I’m not sure how much benefit you’ll gain from using the ADOT kit ahead of it. Still if you can get the ADOT on loan, there’s no harm in trying it, especially with the ‘open window’ a system at your level can provide. You tend to talk a lot of sense in this place so I’d be interested in your findings if you do give this approach a try.
Indeed. But as the addition of the EtherREGEN just before the ND555 made a clear audible improvement, it leads me to believe the ND555 is not perfect at isolating noise. However the EtherREGEN may already have done the heavy lifting here, leaving only marginal benefits to he had in terms of further noise removal/isolation.
Interestingly, an online review of the ENO passive filter (which aims to essentially do what the ADOT aims to do, but by a different means) by Hans Beekhuyzen, who tested the ENO with and without the EtherREGEN, concluded the benefit from the ENO was indeed marginal with the EtherREGEN in place. The same could be true with the ADOT.
I guess there is only one way to find out.
I wonder if there is anyone on here who has tried the ADOT kit with an EtherREGEN?
There was some posts on the site linked to Uptone that liked the SFP optical addition to the etherregen, though not specifically ADOT.
I don’t need a GB network either that I’m aware of. I add new music to my NAS via wifi as I’m usually only adding fewer than 3 or 4 discs at a time. If I’m doing large file transfers I upload directly to the NAS. I did a fair amount of experimenting with the Cisco Catalysts from the old blue 2960 8 port to new GB and PD switches. I found that that the Catalysts are not created equal when it comes to noise floor with the old blue models with onboard PS being the worst and the PD POE being the best in my experience with my system. The GB switches I tried were somewhere in the middle. I landed on the later model PD switches with SMPS and using POE in the last hub for the streamer. I was able to find the 8TT and 8PT versions for $70-$80 USD new unused on ebay. And they really do work well. I understand that some people think it’s all bits are bits or packets are packets but as anyone who’s experimented knows, that is not the case and there’s a lot of variation b/w user systems and of course the expectation bias of the user. 
PS here’s the Catalyst spec page for reference.
Gosh some heavy duty technical speak on this thread !
OP did you get some improvements to you network performance?
HI,
No - I discovered that my Cisco 2960 switches simply aren’t capable of gigabit ethernet performance. However, it’s not a big deal for 99% of the time! My network is more than fast enough to cope with virtually anything I need to do on it.
The only occasions when I would like something a little bit faster are those where I have to carry out a full (rather than incremental) backup of one of my NAS devices, or when I need to restore from a backup which is what prompted my initial post.
On these occasions, I will simple connect my USB backup drive directly to my NAS over USB and run the backup or restore this way - giving me transfer speeds more or less on a par with Gigabit ethernet speeds.
Interesting. T100 base Ethernet should be more than adequate for your purposes. Suggests that the problem is somewhere else deeper in the network management, or maybe to do with your cabling. Assume it’s all punched down properly and terminated correctly? Have you tested/certified it?
But there isn’t a problem. The network is fine - the switches just don’t cater for gigabit speeds and that’s absolutely fine.
As a matter of interest my cabling is (certified) BJC Cat 6a.
Yes, it is just the Cisco switch, I would not be worried about it, I am using SFP optical out from my Cisco switch, and it can do only 1 Gbit per sec, and that is more than enough for the Linn streamer. However, I do have a very high speed Netgear switch which I use for everything else.
Brilliant- certified at home! I never managed to fork out for that in my house! Glad you got there and managed to solve the problem 
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.