[Andrew_WOT]

Uuh, … guys? Need your help.
Where have you read that ‘LAN itself… by specs… is transformer coupled?‘
It‘s been a while since I read the IEEE 802.3* . Last time when the IEC 60950 changed into IEC 62368.
And maybe I‘ve missed something…
But I really can’t remember something about fully transformer, galvanic, optical or whatever
(de-)coupled.
There are additional network adapters and of course router, switches, repeater even network cards implementing these IEC standards.
But that’s mostly about surge protection and the newer one about grounding or at least significantly more detailed.
Maybe you missread the IEC 60601? Which discribes additional network isolators among other things.
It also would baffle active LAN and PoE.
Or you have gear which additionally features galvanic coupling?
A premium router?
Our PC/Laptop mainboard LAN doesn‘t have.
And no streamer I have opened to date.

Don’t want to talk about this thing is snake oil or opens audiophile heaven.
That everyone’s own decision/experience or maybe …fun?!

But … it’s a good idea to mention:
‚please avoid mechanical stress on your device‘ or something like this.
At least for ifi‘s insurance.

If you are a vintage hifi fan, the latest state of the art stuff purchaser, a frantic digital believer, an enthusiastic snail oil tester, a Stax, ZMF, Beats or Grado fan,
or beware …just a music listener:
Enjoy your music!

The answer is here
https://electronics.stackexchange.c...re-ethernet-rj45-sockets-magnetically-coupled

 

[FauxReal]

Jitter is incredibly easy to measure, so it should be trivial to test whether or not this actually works. I'm willing to bet it does more harm than good in most cases.

Easy to detect. Also, the data coming over Ethernet is digital and the protocol has built in error detection and correction. There's no such thing as the RF noise this description is inferring. I'd love to read a technical paper on how this thing allegedly works, all with no power source.

 

[FauxReal]

All wires we use to transfer signals are susceptible to interference from EM and RF bands. While that noise won’t stop the data transmission, it will enter a component and then ride on the signal into every other component. These devices aren’t about the “ones and zeros”, but it’s important to remember that the digital data is transferred via analogue means.
Try the product and see if it’s for you. I can imagine it helping in noisy environments.

Digital data is transferred over analog means, but it's still digital with a digital protocol that has error checking and correction built in. So it is about "ones and zeroes." If there is enough interference to flip a bit, how could this device know the difference and correct it? All without any power source? And how would it know the data was corrupt when it can't even process the checksum built into TCP/IP... A protocol designed for data integrity. And somehow do it better?

 

[AnalogEuphoria]

I think the money is better spent on a DAC that has really good internal jitter attenuation no matter what the source is.

 

[killaHz]

How does noise get inside TCP/IP packets?

 

[AussieMick]

Digital data is transferred over analog means, but it's still digital with a digital protocol that has error checking and correction built in. So it is about "ones and zeroes." If there is enough interference to flip a bit, how could this device know the difference and correct it? All without any power source? And how would it know the data was corrupt when it can't even process the checksum built into TCP/IP... A protocol designed for data integrity. And somehow do it better?

When I say it’s not about bits, I mean that the noise devices such as this try to deal with has nothing at all to do with whether or not the data is transferred accurately. The noise from RF and EM doesn’t corrupt data.
However, this noise can and does affect analogue circuits further down the line, inside DACs, preamplifiers and power amplifiers. By attempting to eliminate such noise before it has the chance to enter the system at all, the thinking is that damage further down the line in the analogue circuitry is reduced.

I’ll say it again, there is no suggestion whatsoever that this type of noise is corrupting data. There’s really no such thing as a “digital only” system in audio. Music playing systems incorporating a digital source are always mixed signal systems. That’s why much of the sound of a DAC is the power supply and output circuits. There is always analogue alongside digital, and it’s the analogue parts that noise can be so detrimental for.
“Measured evidence” is never going to come from checking if the data has been transferred successfully.

 

[Davesrose]

However, this noise can and does affect analogue circuits further down the line, inside DACs, preamplifiers and power amplifiers. By attempting to eliminate such noise before it has the chance to enter the system at all, the thinking is that damage further down the line in the analogue circuitry is reduced.

How is it carried further on? An interconnect could be analog, but if the output digital bandwidth is far beyond an audio codec going to DAC, I don't see how it has an effect. Basic cat5 bandwidth specs are far beyond the specs of 2 channel audio codecs.

 

[Empyah]

I don’t understand why people will jump on this thread just to be negative and sarcastic. It’s mean spirited. Why bother?

ASR cultists. Problem with that kind is that they don't even understand their glorious leaders measurements (not that he does either or pretends not to).

 

[AussieMick]

How is it carried further on? An interconnect could be analog, but if the output digital bandwidth is far beyond an audio codec going to DAC, I don't see how it has an effect. Basic cat5 bandwidth specs are far beyond the specs of 2 channel audio codecs.

Two very good and easily followed discussions with people who know what they’re doing. A good place to start.

 

[569424]

ASR cultists. Problem with that kind is that they don't even understand their glorious leaders measurements (not that he does either or pretends not to).

Exactly right. I always tell people, even if it doesn’t make a difference, it’s your money and your life, and there’s no shame in donating to an audio company.

 

[569424]

Can’t wait for the first impressions of this, has anyone tried these yet? Does it deliver chocolatey mids?

 

[nioh]

I just read the description on the IFI page.
It says the product is shielded and so is protected from “external” interference. It also has surge protection.
Sounds simple enough to me.
Of course this won’t protect the Ethernet cable itself from any EMI/RFI interference, only at the socket.

Anyways I’m not an expert in electrical and electronics.

 

[Chuck Dee]

I don’t understand why people will jump on this thread just to be negative and sarcastic. It’s mean spirited. Why bother?

Concur.
It's the main reason I'll never become a forum sponsor on any forum, anywhere, ever.
The best feedback/comment comes from those who actually decide to invest in a product to find out for themselves if it's a worthwhile investment or benefit in their system rather than just pre-emptively judge something based on their own biased mini-theories.
What CAN work is a no-obligation-to-purchase loan scheme as I facilitate for my cables. I don't know why more companies don't offer this too.

 

[ExTubeGamer]

The real question remains unanswered: does the LAN iSilencer have good synergy with the Moondrop LAN? LAN + LAN sounds like a good match.

 

[jsk ksj]

The claim is "typically, one can expect to hear more clarity, greater dynamic extension and sharper leading edges, making the music sound more vivid and open"

Cool, sounds great. Show a reasonable amount of evidence & my money will be your money.

ps why £89 / $89 / 89 euros? uk company, manufactured in uk & £>$. I would appreciate a few £ off rather than "price symmetry"

I can understand economies of scale, but surely outweighed on low volume sale item like this when transport / taxes are taken into account?