[bfreedma]

i think each network switch limits incoming noise to the noiselevel it was "designed"for, tho this is just an uneducated guess
no the last switch doesnt know its the last one, but the the noise doesnt gets lower than the switch noise itself... it isnt that hard to understand

You should stop making "uneducated guesses" and spend a little time reviewing how Ethernet and the 802 standards work. Stop trying to "figure it out" and read about how it actually works - your guessing is taking you in the wrong direction.

This is always hard to explain to audiophiles without a background in network engineering, but there is nothing special about a packet containing audio. Packetized data is universal - audio is no different than any other content in a packet.

You are correct about one thing - this isn't that hard to understand. A few days of reading will help you understand the basics of routing, packetized data and packet content, buffering, and error correction. Once you have that basic understanding, it will be obvious that Ethernet audiophile tweaks (switches (which are actually routers), cables, converters, quantum stickers, etc.) are snake oil.

Expecting a boutique switch/router to improve audio is equivalent to expecting a boutique switch/router to turn a $1000 deposit into a $1000000 deposit during the transaction with your bank. Nonsense, obviously, yet the myths persist and propagate.

 

[bfreedma]

what about the ground/shielding?

Ethernet is galvanically isolated at each connector. Why are you worried about this?

 

[bigshot]

Every word gives him something to reply to with more blather. Animated gifs give him nothing to quote.

 

[bfreedma]

Every word gives him something to reply to.

You're making more posts than anyone other than the OP. Those memes are really moving the conversation forward though...

 

[bigshot]

I’m enjoying myself more than anyone else!

There is no conversation to move forward. He isn’t listening, just talking.

 

[Ghoostknight]

This is always hard to explain to audiophiles without a background in network engineering, but there is nothing special about a packet containing audio. Packetized data is universal - audio is no different than any other content in a packet.

You are correct about one thing - this isn't that hard to understand. A few days of reading will help you understand the basics of routing, packetized data and packet content, buffering, and error correction. Once you have that basic understanding, it will be obvious that Ethernet audiophile tweaks (switches (which are actually routers), cables, converters, quantum stickers, etc.) are snake oil.

well for me the important thing is how it sounds, and with many audiophile claims/myths it suprised me subjectivists 80% of the time actually have a point, so i got to the conclusion that trusting what you hear is more important than what some people claim, even if they come from a scientific perspective
i notice something, accept it and try to understand it more objectively (eq find some possible explanations), but for me "the fact" is that there is a difference
some will understand it, some think my approach is wrong.. im ok with that everyone made their own expierences

---

also back to the ground/shielding question
1. galvanic isolation can let noise trough, as the measurements from alphaaudio show
2. i have a hard time to understand that even if the datalines apply CMR that the noise will actually be reduced below the noise level of the switch itself

 

[bfreedma]

well for me the important thing is how it sounds, and with many audiophile claims/myths it suprised me subjectivists 80% of the time actually have a point, so i got to the conclusion that trusting what you hear is more important than what some people claim, even if they come from a scientific perspective
some will understand it, some think my approach is wrong.. im ok with that everyone made their own expierences

---

also back to the ground/shielding question
1. galvanic isolation can let noise trough, as the measurements from alphaaudio show
2. i have a hard time to understand that even if the datalines apply CMR that the noise will actually be reduced below the noise level of the switch itself

Ethernet isn't based on experience, it's a global standard with specific operational parameters that were largely defined decades ago and have worked so well that we take a network of billions of connected devices for granted.

You can spend money based on marketing BS and the flock of customers who desperately want to suspend physics and EE so they can backslap each other over tales of money wasted on gear that absolutely can't improve Ethernet.

Or you can listen to people who have decades of domain experience. Choice is yours and sadly, we both know what choice you're making.

 

[bigshot]

I'd like to know how the figure of 80% for subjectivist accuracy was determined... Was it a scientific survey?

 

[redrol]

well for me the important thing is how it sounds, and with many audiophile claims/myths it suprised me subjectivists 80% of the time actually have a point, so i got to the conclusion that trusting what you hear is more important than what some people claim, even if they come from a scientific perspective
i notice something, accept it and try to understand it more objectively (eq find some possible explanations), but for me "the fact" is that there is a difference
some will understand it, some think my approach is wrong.. im ok with that everyone made their own expierences

---

also back to the ground/shielding question
1. galvanic isolation can let noise trough, as the measurements from alphaaudio show
2. i have a hard time to understand that even if the datalines apply CMR that the noise will actually be reduced below the noise level of the switch itself

You are leaning into PLACEBO. Ethernet is used in stuff that matters a lot more than stupid audio crap. FAR FAR more money is at stake for high end ethernet devices than with audio stuff. Im sorry, I cant give you any of this mumbo jumpo, your brain is malleable and you are changing your opinion based on your wallet spending.NOT what is actually going on.

[edit] im sorry, im entirely over being nice about this scam bull garbage. Saying it directly: YOUY ARE GETING SCAMMED OUT OF YOUR MONEY.

 

[Ghoostknight]

Ethernet is used in stuff that matters a lot more than stupid audio crap. FAR FAR more money is at stake for high end ethernet devices than with audio stuff.

i never said data integrity is a issue, since the internet wouldnt work otherwise... noise at those level i speak about just seem to matter in audio tho, IF noise is really the culprit here, which i cant say for sure but its the next logical thing after data integrity and for me, since people are hearing a difference there must be some reason for it...

im sorry, im entirely over being nice about this scam bull garbage. Saying it directly: YOUY ARE GETING SCAMMED OUT OF YOUR MONEY.

yea you can believe that, tho im someone not just buying the next "snakeoil" (since i dont believe all of it is actually good "snakeoil") if you guys think that, so no worrys, i use wlan myself and would probably try to use fiber for ethernet which i consider to switch to in the future

and i should probably also say, if all im hearing is placebo, then its a pretty trippy placbo, consistent over weeks and months if i dont change my setup

 

[bigshot]

YOU ARE GETING SCAMMED OUT OF YOUR MONEY.

Even worse than that... He's getting scammed out of his money and he's busy trying to think up excuses to make it OK.

 

[A Jedi]

Let's think of it this way:

If there was noise (bad data) coming through your ethernet, or there was noise that was effecting the following component (your DAC or PC), your next online purchase may deduct $19qz3@.3d from your bank account. How many times has that happened? Or is the gibberish you've added to this thread the fault of a non-audiophile switch? Perhaps your arguments are very well thought out and highly logical. They're just coming across as nonsense due to that darn switch.

 

[gregorio]

well for me the important thing is how it sounds,

You’re joking? The signal in an Ethernet cable is in the high hundreds of megahertz, there is no “how it sounds”, no speakers/HPs can reproduce it and it’s miles beyond the limitations of human hearing anyway.

with many audiophile claims/myths it suprised me subjectivists 80% of the time actually have a point

What 80% of subjectivists and how are you surprised by a fact/figure that you yourself just made-up?

so i got to the conclusion that trusting what you hear is more important than what some people claim, even if they come from a scientific perspective

Firstly, thanks for demonstrating yet again what castleofargh clearly explained, you’re again basing your “conclusion” on a fallacy, the Argumentum ad Populam Fallacy and even more impressively, you’ve simply made-up the level of popularity! That’s funny.

Secondly, you keep going on about what “you hear”, how you trust your hearing and that it’s “more important” but clearly that is a LIE! If it really were “more important” then you would have tried to actually identify what “you hear” but you haven’t bothered. The actual truth is that you don’t care at all what “you hear”, you don’t trust your hearing and it is not “more important” to you! The ONLY thing that’s important to you is what you think you’re experiencing, regardless of whether you’re actually hearing any difference or it’s just a figment of your imagination.

also back to the ground/shielding question
1. galvanic isolation can let noise trough, as the measurements from alphaaudio show
2. i have a hard time to understand that even if the datalines apply CMR that the noise will actually be reduced below the noise level of the switch itself

1. Another lie and you know you’re lying because it’s already been explained to you! Again, the measurements from alpha-audio were of the output signal, they did NOT measure the signal after the receiving port and isolation and therefore your assertion is FALSE, the measurements did NOT show that galvanic isolation can let noise through because they did not measure that!

2. There we have it “out of your own mouth”! There really is no issue with noise, the issue is entirely that you “have a hard time to understand”, which is surprising because as mentioned several times, it’s not hard to understand! Maybe you can explain how a shielded cable can reduce “the noise level of the switch itself”? Not without more made-up nonsense or marketing BS you can’t. What CMR drastically reduces is any noise/interference added after the differential signal is created.

Your points here are self contradictory. You showed evidence there’s a relatively high amount of noise (on the port output) but you also admit that it must be removed, otherwise the noise would sum from successive switches/routers and the internet simply wouldn’t work. So how do you think that noise is removed, if it isn’t from the use of data buffers, galvanic isolation and CMR? You think maybe the all the world’s Ethernet switches have been infused with audiophile magic?

i never said data integrity is a issue, since the internet wouldnt work otherwise... noise at those level i speak about just seem to matter in audio tho

What noise at what level? There isn’t any Ethernet noise at the DAC output, so how can no noise “seem to matter in audio”? Obviously it can’t matter to audio, although clearly it does matter to audiophile marketing!

IF noise is really the culprit here, which i cant say for sure but its the next logical thing after data integrity

As the noise is removed by galvanic isolation, CMR and data buffering, how on earth is noise “the next logical thing”? Noise is obviously the least logical thing and you’re yet again demonstrating you aren’t capable of logical reasoning!

and for me, since people are hearing a difference there must be some reason for it...

Firstly, what people are hearing a difference? There are quite a few people who claim to hear a difference but I’ve not heard of even one single person who has reliably demonstrated the ability to actually hear a difference, despite audio being transferred over ethernet for about 30 years! Why do you think that is? So the question really is: Why are some people claiming to hear a difference? There is “some reason for it”, a proven reason that’s very well established, well studied and has been consistently demonstrated for a century or so!

and i should probably also say, if all im hearing is placebo, then its a pretty trippy placbo, consistent over weeks and months if i dont change my setup

So you don’t even know the basics of perception errors (placebo) but are nevertheless willing to argue and make false claims/assertions about them, even in an actual sound science forum? Astounding!

Some perception errors/biases affect virtually everyone and last a lifetime, the stereo/soundstage effect being an obvious example. Others just last a few moments, only affect a percentage of people and/or are inconsistent. You really should learn the basics, not just of perceptual errors but of Ethernet and audio in general BEFORE you start making assertions and arguing about it, because that ONLY demonstrates ignorance and foolishness!!

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

Another lie and you know you’re lying because it’s already been explained to you! Again, the measurements from alpha-audio were of the output signal, they did NOT measure the signal after the receiving port and isolation and therefore your assertion is FALSE, the measurements did NOT show that galvanic isolation can let noise through because they did not measure that!

shouldnt the switch ports also apply industry standard galvanic isolation??? like every ethernet port, i dont see the need to measure after the receiving port if already the galvanic isolation on the ports of switch already should do the job just fine
and i still think ground/shield is not isolated....

Your points here are self contradictory. You showed evidence there’s a relatively high amount of noise (on the port output) but you also admit that it must be removed, otherwise the noise would sum from successive switches/routers and the internet simply wouldn’t work. So how do you think that noise is removed, if it isn’t from the use of data buffers, galvanic isolation and CMR? You think maybe the all the world’s Ethernet switches have been infused with audiophile magic?

well for me its pretty clear, most music streamer are probably lower noise than some cheap ethernet switches, so the ethernet switch could possibly raise the noise level of the lower noise music streamer, maybe noise under the noise floor of the musicstreamer itself plays a role too...

 

[gregorio]

i dont see the need to measure after the receiving port if already the galvanic isolation on the ports of switch already should do the job just fine

You don’t need to measure after the receiving port, unless of course you want to know how much noise remains after the CMR and galvanic isolation.

and i still think ground/shield is not isolated....

What ground/shield?

well for me its pretty clear, most music streamer are probably lower noise than some cheap ethernet switches, so the ethernet switch could possibly raise the noise level of the lower noise music streamer, maybe noise under the noise floor of the musicstreamer itself plays a role too...

This is the Sound Science subforum and science dictates skepticism for conjectures. When that conjecture has no supporting reliable evidence AND goes against the actual evidence/facts AND is just a made-up “uneducated guess”, there’s only one rational conclusion!

G