[prot]

Dante is the de-facto standard in the pro AOIP world, and is a matter of wait and see if Ravenna is capable of catching up. The other protocols have lost the race already IMHO.

BTW. i work in IT too, nearly 30 years now, Master of Computer Science from a Polytechnic University as educational background. Had nearly every function in software engineering, software design and consultancy except being an operator in a Data Centre. I know a thing or two about IT .

Figured out already that you're not just another audiophile .
We share a very similar background. Judging by your Poly-talk we may even share the same world region.

I just dont share your optimism about their software quality. I prefer the safe assumption that it's same as almost all other software/drivers nowadays. Also I dont think Dante is out of the woods already. Biggest for sure .. best positioned by far clearly. But Aoip itself is a still in inception. Anything might happen anyday .. which is not that bad
E.g. I still want my cheap, small eth2iis board and as long as it works and sounds great I wouldnt care a bit about the aoip standard.

 

[wushuliu]

Well this has been fun but the RN3 is as far as it goes for me. Last thing I expected to end up buying when all I was interested in was an inexpensive usb solution for my budget dacs!
 
Thanks to everyone and especially rob for these illuminating threads.

 

[gldgate]

I've mentioned in a prior post that at least in my system the RedNet seems much more impervious to normal audiophile tweaking than prior setup with USB. I've also noticed something else. When I used a Dual PC set-up I was an avid fan of Infinity Blade/Bughead and thought JRiver sq was kind of meh. I've found over the last 3-4 weeks with the D16 that (a) the sq of whatever player I use (JRMC, Bughead, Roon, HQ Player w/o filters) sounds uniformly excellent and (b) the difference between players is not nearly as pronounced as I remember it being with USB.  I have to say I really don't  have a decided preference anymore from a sq stand point.  Ease of use and other features become more important. I'm using Roon and JRMC most often because of the interface. My past favorite (IB) is essentially being ignored. Anyone else experiencing this? Have to say it is a bit of a surprise.

 

[johnjen]

Status report thus far.
I just added a SR Quantum fuse (standard, not red, nor black) and the AS Statement Silver AES cable is settling in quite nicely at 180hrs+.
 
These 2 tweaks are worth the $$$ and effort, at least in my system anyways.
I was wondering if the fuse tweak would yield similar results to those gains I get with analog gear.
I mean its an all digital circuit with a SMPS instead of a linear power supply which has different current demands.
 
And thus far after testing 3 previous 'audio grade' fuses and now this SR Quantum fuse my observation is yes there are gains to be realized.
And while some might think of them as subtle and seemingly small, their cumulative effects are most welcome.
 
JJ

 

[scottcocoabeach]

  what is the limit of RN3 as compared to D16 ?

 
I was wondering the same thing. I looked at photos of the back of the units and it looks like only the D16 has an AES output. Sweetwater has good pictures of the units that allow you to clearly see the connection options for each. It would be great if someone could weigh in on any other differences. I just recently caught up reading through this thread but don't own a Rednet (yet).

 

[mtoc]

  looks like only the D16 has an AES output. 

 
You betta do som homwork.

 

[somestranger26]

   
I was wondering the same thing. I looked at photos of the back of the units and it looks like only the D16 has an AES output. Sweetwater has good pictures of the units that allow you to clearly see the connection options for each. It would be great if someone could weigh in on any other differences. I just recently caught up reading through this thread but don't own a Rednet (yet).

RN3 also has AES output, but you need a DB25 breakout cable to use it. The D16 supports 176kHz and RN3 does not. For personal audio use, that's about all the differences are.
 
I'm actually using my RN3 with AES now after receiving a DB25-AES cable from @johnjen today. Sounds about the same as using the AS Statement SE RCA cable. JJ is also using his RN3 with AES.

 

[scottcocoabeach]

  RN3 also has AES output, but you need a DB25 breakout cable to use it. The D16 supports 176kHz and RN3 does not. For personal audio use, that's about all the differences are.
 
I'm actually using my RN3 with AES now after receiving a DB25-AES cable from @johnjen today. Sounds about the same as using the AS Statement SE RCA cable. JJ is also using his RN3 with AES.

 
Thanks for actually providing a useful response. I was looking at the round AES connector and missed the flat one. I also understand the Rednet 3 is physically larger than the 16. Here is a picture of the back of the 3. Thanks for providing some more insight on the differences for those of us reading the entire thread to learn more from those who have these units.  
 

 

[jelt2359]

Bear in mind: those optical outs on the RN3 can't be used with your dac, because they're not spdif.

Also the d16 has two ethernet ports so many are going computer -> d16 then d16 to router, which allows you to have laptop connected to both d16 and the Internet. Personally with the RN3 I will be connecting both my laptop and the RN3 to the router to achieve a similar effect.

 

[Iving]

... It would be great if someone could weigh in on any other differences. I just recently caught up reading through this thread but don't own a Rednet (yet).

 
The best summary of R3 vs. D16 differences I have seen was given by Aleg at CA: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/focusrite-rednet-28878/index10.html#post561329
 
In short:
1. Form factor (height) = 2U (R3) vs. 1U (D16)
2. AES is breakout only (R3) vs. integral (D16)
3. SR 192 but not 176.4 (R3) vs. both (D16)
4. 1 x Ethernet port (R3) vs. Primary and Secondary (D16)
and
5. price! Whereas R3 is or was about $1,000 vs. $1,600 in the U.S., in UK/Europe R3 and D16 are much nearer par.
 
What is not a difference is that they are both a loud and striking red. That means that you can id the Focusrite brand in a pro-audio rig from a million miles. Some people don't like it - but I think it's perfectly OK. I mean - it's just part of its personality. I like people and audiophile products just as they are. Live and Let Live

 

[Danutz]

Don't forget about brooklyn version 1 (for rednet 3) vs. version 2 (D16)  

 

[Iving]

  Don't forget about brooklyn version 1 (for rednet 3) vs. version 2 (D16)  

 
Yep - Aleg's post is good on that and some other detail - see link I provided ...

 

[jabbr]

I am running JRiver with DVS on my music server and use JRemote on my IOS devices to control it. As jabbr said you need a audio program that can use the Dante Virtual Soundcard (DVS) ASIO driver.

...

If you want to use JRiver, get the MC 22 version from the MC22 subforum (still beta) and enable the Sox Resampler.
It is soooooooooo much better than the internal resampler from JRiver itself.
I used foobar especially to be able to upsample to 192 kHz with Sox.

But I noticed JRiver has a better network behaviour than Foobar.
Don't know (yet) where or why Foobar is doing worse, but sometimes I had that the Latency monitor showed a peak, esp. when loading or playing large sized tracks (e.g. playing a 2 hour track from a TV performance). I also had the impression that Foobar did not load the track in memory even though I said it should and allowed plenty of size (7 GB).

So maybe with the next release of MC22 I might step over, if they keep the Sox resampler in this release.

Cheers

 

[mourip]

If you want to use JRiver, get the MC 22 version from the MC22 subforum (still beta) and enable the Sox Resampler.
It is soooooooooo much better than the internal resampler from JRiver itself.
I used foobar especially to be able to upsample to 192 kHz with Sox.

But I noticed JRiver has a better network behaviour than Foobar.
Don't know (yet) where or why Foobar is doing worse, but sometimes I had that the Latency monitor showed a peak, esp. when loading or playing large sized tracks (e.g. playing a 2 hour track from a TV performance). I also had the impression that Foobar did not load the track in memory even though I said it should and allowed plenty of size (7 GB).

So maybe with the next release of MC22 I might step over, if they keep the Sox resampler in this release.

Cheers

 
Thanks for the tip. I think that I am prepaid for version 22 so I will give it a try.
 
BTW. You mentioned that you are using AO. Are you just using the Windows GUI interface or have you tried "minimum" or "core" yet with DVS?

 

[mourip]

If you want to use JRiver, get the MC 22 version from the MC22 subforum (still beta) and enable the Sox Resampler.
It is soooooooooo much better than the internal resampler from JRiver itself.
I used foobar especially to be able to upsample to 192 kHz with Sox.

But I noticed JRiver has a better network behaviour than Foobar.
Don't know (yet) where or why Foobar is doing worse, but sometimes I had that the Latency monitor showed a peak, esp. when loading or playing large sized tracks (e.g. playing a 2 hour track from a TV performance). I also had the impression that Foobar did not load the track in memory even though I said it should and allowed plenty of size (7 GB).

So maybe with the next release of MC22 I might step over, if they keep the Sox resampler in this release.

Cheers

 
PS. Is the Sox resampler part of JRMC22 or is it something found from another site and added as a plugin?