Best audiophile switch

[audiobomber]

I personally find that it takes an external clock at least 12dBc/Hz better than that to begin to be worthwhile--so that's about -130dBc/Hz (@10Hz) or better as a place to start.

Then there's the additive effects of the clock cable, which is what irks Ed Meitner and others who argue against an external clock. Surely an internal clock with equal spec beats external.

 

[Superdad]

Then there's the additive effects of the clock cable, which is what irks Ed Meitner and others who argue against an external clock. Surely an internal clock with equal spec beats external.

Sure, cable adds a little but not much--we measure clocks at the end of a cable after all. And an ultra-low phase-noise OCXO (custom to 25MHz if you want to skip a synth; we can't since we also need 250MHz for our signal-conditioning flip-flops) will cost a manufacturer about $300 each (at quantity 250, paid in advance with 6 month lead time).
I do not see anyone putting that level of clock in their boxes. Just because you see an OCXO can does not mean it's necessarily very low phase noise. Most of the OCXOs we see being used are barely better--if at all--than a good Crystek XO.
And if you see a TCXO used, run the other way! There are no TCXOs made that achieve much better than about -90dBc/Hz at 10Hz offset. Makes zero sense to use those.

 

[audiobomber]

Sure, cable adds a little but not much--we measure clocks at the end of a cable after all.

What length of cable? A properly implemented internal clock will be a few millimeters from the chip. Closer is better, right?

 

[Superdad]

What length of cable? A properly implemented internal clock will be a few millimeters from the chip. Closer is better, right?

0.75 meter.
Sure, closer is better, but -145dBc/Hz @10Hz Mutec clock with a good low/even attenuation cable is going to cream all but the most expensive internal clock (which few are using unless you are up around $25K+ DACs).
And again, there are the issues of specific implementation.

Honestly, all the generalization conclusions that folks often want to jump to contribute to why I try to sit out these discussions.

 

[audiobomber]

Honestly, all the generalization conclusions that folks often want to jump to contribute to why I try to sit out these discussions.

And the answers are what we need.

 

[PYP]

From the same site, HiFiAdvice, comes a review of the Silent Angel Bonn NX switch, which is already equipped with two internal TCXO clocks. Interestingly, in the context of our discussion, the author enhances its performance by combining it with a Genesis GX external 25MHz clock. Today, the NX+GX combo is still the author’s favorite switch setup.

It is prudent to consider this one reviewer's opinion. He is very thorough, but my own preferences don't seem to align with his, therefore his reviews are interesting but don't help point me in a specific direction. That isn't a criticism. Just stating the obvious that it is most useful to find a reviewer who hears it like you do.

I assume everyone reading this thread is just looking to narrow down the number of switches for an in-home demo. Do we care about how the manufacturer gets there if we like the product? It is interesting from an intellectual perspective, but hearing is believing.

 

[NigelB]

I know for certain that changes upstream from the optical conversion are readily audible. Something capable of changing the sound quality is traveling with the light, and obviously not contained in the data, otherwise one would hear gross distortion or dropouts.

Here is the explanation from John Swenson, while discussing Sonore products (opticalModule and opticalRendu):
"The important thing to understand is that ALL digital signals carry the "fingerprint" of the clock used to produce them. When a signal coming from a box with cheap clocks comes into a box (via Ethernet or USB etc) with a much better clock, the higher level of phase noise carried on the data signal can contaminate the phase noise of the "good" clock in the second box. Exactly how this happens is complicated, I've written about this in detail if you want to look it up and see what is going on.

The contamination is not complete, every time the signal gets "reclocked" by a much better clock the resulting signal carries an attenuated version of the first clock layered on top of the fingerprint of the second clock. The word "reclocked" just means the signal is regenerated by a circuit fed a different clock. It may be a better or a worse clock, reclocking doesn't always make things better!

As an example if you start with an Ethernet signal coming out of a cheap switch, the clock fingerprint is going to be pretty bad. If this goes into a circuit with a VERY good clock, the signal coming out contains a reduced fingerprint from the first clock layered on top of the good clock. If you feed THIS signal into another circuit with a very good clock, the fingerprint from the original clock gets reduced even further. But if you feed this signal into a box with a bad clock, you are back to a signal with a bad fingerprint.

The summary is that stringing together devices with GOOD clocking can dramatically attenuate the results of an upstream bad clock."

The explanation above handily explains why stacking switches can be an improvement, and why devices should optimally be deployed from worst clock to best clock. I follow Sonore and UpTone forums on Audiophile Style, because John Swenson and Alex Crespi are forerunners in the network audio field, and very free with information, from whom I and many others have learned a great deal.

I believe you are the only manufacturer still posting to this discussion?

I am indeed, though I feel John’s strong presence by proxy through the dominance of quotes from one manufacturer rather than others (above being a case in point). I am happy to leave non-manufacturers to it, though I think it’s been important to provide balance and to leave my unanswered questions about phase noise hanging.

Changes to upstream (of an optical connection) are readily explained by ground plane noise. The data packets are neither harmed nor enhanced.

 

[NigelB]

And the answers are what we need.

Answers would be great!

 

[NigelB]

I assume everyone reading this thread is just looking to narrow down the number of switches for an in-home demo. Do we care about how the manufacturer gets there if we like the product? It is interesting from an intellectual perspective, but hearing is believing.

Absolutely this, I hope!

It’s been enlightening as to how the last few pages have diverted into theoretical design concerns, some of which you know I am highly sceptical of such as clocks and phase noise, whereas reports of people’s comparative listening experiences have been almost entirely lacking. What a missed opportunity to help each other!

 

[Di-fi]

It is prudent to consider this one reviewer's opinion. He is very thorough, but my own preferences don't seem to align with his, therefore his reviews are interesting but don't help point me in a specific direction. That isn't a criticism. Just stating the obvious that it is most useful to find a reviewer who hears it like you do.

I assume everyone reading this thread is just looking to narrow down the number of switches for an in-home demo. Do we care about how the manufacturer gets there if we like the product? It is interesting from an intellectual perspective, but hearing is believing.

I share the HiFiAdvice reviews because he compares switches based on sound rather than just technical specs. Each switch has its own character, and even if a particular profile isn’t to your taste, these comparisons can still help set expectations and guide choices. Ultimately, as you said, hearing is believing—but reviews like these can be useful in narrowing down options for an in-home demo.

 

[Di-fi]

whereas reports of people’s comparative listening experiences have been almost entirely lacking

The most difficult part is putting sound quality into words. Looking back at this thread, it’s rare to see SQ impressions described in such detail across multiple phrases. The above quoted HiFiAdvice author is particularly good at it. That said, he hasn’t reviewed and compared all 20+ switches discussed here, which would have been valuable.

 

[Di-fi]

Honestly, all the generalization conclusions that folks often want to jump to contribute to why I try to sit out these discussions.

I'd say, of course, that’s coming from a manufacturer—fluent in technical lingo and naturally focused on highlighting features to sell their audiophile switch. Understandably, users get these fancy features in their devices but often have no clue why they’re there or how they actually impact sound quality. And then ”there are the issues of implementation” —one thing for the manufacturer in the design phase, another for users trying to make it work in their own setup, which manufacturers have zero control over. So yeah, patience is key... and speaking of patience, thanks for yours!

 

[audiobomber]

I am indeed, though I feel John’s strong presence by proxy through the dominance of quotes from one manufacturer rather than others

John Swenson is an engineer, with decades of experience in silicon chip design, and the designer of the very first audiophile switch. You have a fundamental disagreement with him and I will dare to say the designers of all(?) other audiophile switches (Melco, JCAT, SOtM, Sonore, UpTone, AferDark, Silent Angel, NuPrime, English Electric, LHY, Telegartner, etc.), and many audiophiles, regarding the importance of clocks in the network.

I follow John's writings because he has steered me, with his deep knowledge and unfailingly great and clear advice, regarding switches and other topics, on the journey to improve the sound of my network.

There will never be agreement on the "best audiophile switch", just as there is no agreement on the best audiophile anything.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

John Swenson is an engineer, with decades of experience in silicon chip design. You have a fundamental disagreement with him and I will dare to say the designers of all(?) other audiophile switches (Melco, JCAT, SOtM, Sonore, UpTone, Silent Angel, NuPrime, English Electric, LHY, Telegartner, etc.), and many audiophiles, regarding the importance of clocks in the network.

I follow John's writings because he has steered me, with his deep knowledge and unfailingly great and clear advice, regarding switches and other topics, on the journey to improve the sound of my network. There will never be agreement on the "best audiophile switch", just as there is no agreement on the best audiophile anything.

Dan, Hear, Hear! Completely agree. John has been a wonderful resource and his products are top shelf and reasonable. I am going to do some experimenting with clocks now, in my system. Have a couple in transit and I will hear for my self.

 

[agisthos]

I share the HiFiAdvice reviews because he compares switches based on sound rather than just technical specs. Each switch has its own character, and even if a particular profile isn’t to your taste, these comparisons can still help set expectations and guide choices. Ultimately, as you said, hearing is believing—but reviews like these can be useful in narrowing down options for an in-home demo.

And he is a good and careful reviewer, his content worth sharing.

 

[PYP]

And he is a good and careful reviewer, his content worth sharing.

I agree. The point I was trying to make is that he provides his opinion of the sound. One cannot assume that his opinion is fact (this is what these switches sound like). And, of course, he is listening within the context of a system which is most likely very, very different from the readers.

I read his reviews and enjoy them. But I have not heard what he heard with some equipment that I owned or own. That doesn't make him wrong, but it also makes his reviews less practically applicable for me. His preferences are different than mine. They might be different from others too.

 

[PYP]

The most difficult part is putting sound quality into words.

Agreed. I know I can't do it. The other difficulty is being able to compare networks. I believe it is not possible to predict outcomes even if all the components, and the order they appear, are listed. It makes me wish for a diagnostic that could show the kinds of distortion, the sources of that distortion and the magnitude.

 

[NigelB]

There will never be agreement on the "best audiophile switch", just as there is no agreement on the best audiophile anything.

Of course. Assessments of “the” (or perhaps our) best audiophile switch - indeed the or our best audiophile anything - should be based on listening experiences not theories, as it is ultimately in the listening experience that we personally assess the relevance of theories to practice and make our ownership decision.

 

[TonyW]

I just received the Tracking Number for my new Synergistic Research Ethernet Switch UEF, the new version. The paperwork doesn't call it anything different. Promised Delivery date is Wednesday, March 5th. I can't wait. But I have to.

I'm just an engineer, not much of a writer but I will do my best to describe the differences I hear between the old and new switch. I already sent the loaner, old version back today but I have been using the original SR Ethernet Switch UEF, released in 2021, I believe, since early December- nearly three months. And I changed nothing else in my system since that time.

Expect photos, initial impressions, and then more impressions after 3 days and after one week (168 hours). If you hear nothing back from me it will be because the switch is so good I can't stop listening to music.

The current version SR Ethernet Switch is excellent by my measure and worth keeping. But of course as soon as I heard about the release of a Mark II version, I decided to wait for it. I have not heard other $2000 and up switches in my stereo system. All I have to go by is that this current version switch to me is a big improvement over the LHY SW-8 and the EE-8. Both of those were a big step up from FMC's to my ears- and I was using LPS's and Finisar Trans/Receivers. The difference, the improvement in sound is enough to prompt me to spend the money on the SR Switch.

Can't wait to see what Version II can really do. For me.

PS.
I bought these UEF enhancers in December and have been using them with the loaner switch. I am going to be disciplined and not plug these into the new, Mark II version switch the first week.

 

[italia]

The current version SR Ethernet Switch is excellent by my measure and worth keeping. But of course as soon as I heard about the release of a Mark II version, I decided to wait for it. I have not heard other $2000 and up switches in my stereo system. All I have to go by is that this current version switch to me is a big improvement over the LHY SW-8 and the EE-8. Both of those were a big step up from FMC's to my ears- and I was using LPS's and Finisar Trans/Receivers. The difference, the improvement in sound is enough to prompt me to spend the money on the SR Switch.

Can't wait to see what Version II can really do. For me.

I'm very interested in your thoughts on this new SR switch. I currently have the LHY FMC feeding a LHY SW-6 Switch via the outstanding OptoSpan SFP's and OptoSpan Super Low Loss Fiber Optic Cable. My music server connects via 1-meter SR Atmosphere SX Reference Ethernet to the SW-6 Switch which connects to my Streamer via another of the same 1-Meter SR Ethernet cable. My Firewall/Router connects to the LHY FMC for Qobuz streaming.

I suspect replacing the LHY FMC with a second LHY SW-6 would be a nice gain in sound improvement, but am considering a better switch such as the SR.