Best audiophile switch

[agisthos]

Ok here are the things he said he does. I do not know what actual router this applies to, but any router can do most of them.

MTU at 9216
Jumboframes disabled
Flowcontrol disabled (both RX & TX)
802.1x disabled
Keepalive disabled on all ports
Spanning tree at RSTP with priority at 32768
Vlan enabled, set to untagged
Switch port modes routing disabled, switching enabled, security disabled
IPv6 disabled
I do have thread detection partially enabled

 

[matthias]

Ok here are the things he said he does. I do not know what actual router this applies to, but any router can do most of them.

AFAIK, Ubiquiti Dream Machine Pro

 

[kennyb123]

Ok here are the things he said he does. I do not know what actual router this applies to, but any router can do most of them.

I would advise caution about applying his settings across one’s entire network. That MTU of 9216 is a common jumbo frame size. According to CoPilot “jumbo frames should reduce latency and CPU usage—if not, something’s misaligned…9216 can be a smart move—but only if your whole pipeline is jumbo-ready…If any device in the path only supports 1500 or 9000, packets may be dropped or fragmented.”

I suspect that Taiko ensures that all their networked devices are configured to take advantage of this setting.

 

[matthias]

I would advise caution about applying his settings across one’s entire network. That MTU of 9216 is a common jumbo frame size. According to CoPilot “jumbo frames should reduce latency and CPU usage—if not, something’s misaligned…9216 can be a smart move—but only if your whole pipeline is jumbo-ready…If any device in the path only supports 1500 or 9000, packets may be dropped or fragmented.”

I suspect that Taiko ensures that all their networked devices are configured to take advantage of this setting.

There is a discussion about MTU in the later posts like #8287

 

[NigelB]

There's a lot of good stuff here. I can't help but wonder whether athisconversation about router optimisation deserves its own thread rather than being buried in a thread about the best audiophile switch. It would certainly make it easier to find and it might attract new participants with their own experiences to share.

 

[ConG2]

If you have a managed switch you can use all these values, exspecially if this is a L3 switche (=router).

 

[surfing_dude]

Sorry for interrupting your thread, but one thing I do wonder- If you want a VLAN untagged on your network, why do you even set it as a router
(TCP/IP Layer3) and not as a switch layer2, avoiding all the hassle of NAT, FW rules, static routes (What a pain in the *ss to configure the "buggy" edgerouter )?
Is the hardware offloading not supported in switch mode?

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Sorry for interrupting your thread, but one thing I do wonder- If you want a VLAN untagged on your network, why do you even set it as a router
(TCP/IP Layer3) and not as a switch layer2, avoiding all the hassle of NAT, FW rules, static routes (What a pain in the *ss to configure the "buggy" edgerouter )?
Is the hardware offloading not supported in switch mode?

Please start a new thread about ROUTERS.

 

[Di-fi]

I get the point that router talk can feel off-topic in a “best switch” thread. But its worth noting that the possible uplift can’t always be achieved by the switch alone. A switch is usually a fixed hardware solution and once designed, it doesn’t evolve much beyond power/cabling tweaks. A router on the otherhand can incorporate software-based optimizations (traffic management, timing, isolation features, wifi, firmware updates etc).

This is why companies like Taiko and JCAT/XACT go beyond switches and also offer router-level solutions. Their designs have shown tighter focus, a lower percieved noise floor, and better dynamics — qualities that reach directly into musical engagement. According to users routers can influence both secondary qualities (clarity, detail, lower noise floor) and, in some cases, even primary qualities (better dynamics, flow, staging). VLANs, subnets and traffic limiting are worthwhile, but they’re really just part of the bigger picture. Both routers and switches can matter — just in different ways, and not nessesarily in every setup.

Switches can’t be used without a router, maybe router stuff can be discussed here: What are the contenders for top audiophile routers? Are routers even more impactful than switches?

 

[Republicoftexas69]

I get the point that router talk can feel off-topic in a “best switch” thread. But its worth noting that the possible uplift can’t always be achieved by the switch alone. A switch is usually a fixed hardware solution and once designed, it doesn’t evolve much beyond power/cabling tweaks. A router on the otherhand can incorporate software-based optimizations (traffic management, timing, isolation features, wifi, firmware updates etc).

This is why companies like Taiko and JCAT/XACT go beyond switches and also offer router-level solutions. Their designs have shown tighter focus, a lower percieved noise floor, and better dynamics — qualities that reach directly into musical engagement. According to users routers can influence both secondary qualities (clarity, detail, lower noise floor) and, in some cases, even primary qualities (better dynamics, flow, staging). VLANs, subnets and traffic limiting are worthwhile, but they’re really just part of the bigger picture. Both routers and switches can matter — just in different ways, and not nessesarily in every setup.

Switches can’t be used without a router, maybe router stuff can be discussed here: What are the contenders for top audiophile routers? Are routers even more impactful than switches?

Not what the threads about. Start a new thread.

 

[NigelB]

I get the point that router talk can feel off-topic in a “best switch” thread. But its worth noting that the possible uplift can’t always be achieved by the switch alone.

I am happy to assert that the deployment of a well-designed audio-optimised switch just before the streamer will make a far bigger difference to the "aggregate" sound quality which the listener enjoys than any network traffic optimisation which takes place at the router. It's about accumulated noise and this is dealt with most effectively at the very last node in the network this side of the streamer, not at the very start of the in-house network. Yes of course you can do both, but I can tell you for certain which will make the biggest difference.

A switch is usually a fixed hardware solution and once designed, it doesn’t evolve much beyond power/cabling tweaks. A router on the otherhand can incorporate software-based optimizations (traffic management, timing, isolation features, wifi, firmware updates etc).

A switch is indeed usually a fixed hardware solution and deliberately so. There is less electronic activity in an unmanaged switch than in a managed one (same argument as above re activity in routers, subnets etc) and an unmanaged switch comes ready-evolved!

Switches can’t be used without a router, maybe router stuff can be discussed here: What are the contenders for top audiophile routers? Are routers even more impactful than switches?

That is exactly the right thread for further discussions of routers. Thanks for highlighting.

 

[Elliot G.]

I am happy to assert that the deployment of a well-designed audio-optimised switch just before the streamer will make a far bigger difference to the "aggregate" sound quality which the listener enjoys than any network traffic optimisation which takes place at the router. It's about accumulated noise and this is dealt with most effectively at the very last node in the network this side of the streamer. Yes of course you can do both, but I can tell you for certain which will make the biggest difference.

A switch is indeed usually a fixed hardware solution and deliberately so. There is less electronic activity in an unmanaged switch than in a managed one (same argument as above re activity in routers, subnets etc) and an unmanaged switch comes ready-evolved!

That is exactly the right thread for further discussions of routers. Thanks for highlighting.

I agree that attacking the issues at the end of the signal path before it enters the streamer or server makes the most sense. I have tried various cables pre switch and they do something but not nearly the difference I achieved after the switch I know use and chose and the super ethernet cable that comes from the switch into the streamer.
I am not saying a router can’t help but in most cases it’s far from the desired place and has many things that effect the sound post router .
This many not be the case for some but it’s certainly the case for others ,

 

[kennyb123]

I am not saying a router can’t help but in most cases it’s far from the desired place and has many things that effect the sound post router .

The improvements I heard from improving the power to my router were surprisingly easy to hear. I can’t explain why, but It would seem that the better we’ve done at reducing noise affecting our system, the more that a router can be heard to be having an effect. I wish that wasn’t the case.

 

[Di-fi]

. It's about accumulated noise and this is dealt with most effectively at the very last node in the network this side of the streamer, not at the very start of the in-house network. Yes of course you can do both, but I can tell you for certain which will make the biggest difference.

Nigel, I get your point. Dealing with accumulated noise at the last node before the streamer will usually have the strongest impact, no argument there. But I don’t think it’s in the interest of anyone here to frame this thread as if it should be exclusively about the switch hardware itself.(it never really has been).

If you look back through the discussion, we’ve covered all kinds of enhancements around the “best audiophile switch”: PSUs, SFP modules, isolation, fibre, Ethernet cables, the last cable, shield tied to ground or not, grounding, fibre media converters, footers, isolation platforms, shielding… all of these have been part of the picture, regardless of how big or small the uplift.

If router-level or traffic-management improvements aren’t what we want to cover here, that’s fine and maybe that part belongs in another thread. I just wouldn’t want people to miss out on options that can be meaningful too for their best audiophile switch.

 

[kennyb123]

If router-level or traffic-management improvements aren’t what we want to cover here, that’s fine and maybe that part belongs in another thread. I just wouldn’t want people to miss out on options that can be meaningful too for their best audiophile switch.

The chances of missing out on something are much higher when information is just strewn about with no regard for the title of the thread. I think when it gets to the point that several regular participants ask nicely to move the conversation to another thread, that request should be respected with only two possible outcomes: 1) the off topic discussion is halted or 2) the off topic discussion is moved to another thread or a new one. Creating the conditions that encourage even more off topic responses should never be one of the outcomes of being asked to start a thread as the goal at that point should be to prompt get things back on topic.

I think there would be a ton of value in a network optimization thread.

 

[matthias]

I think there would be a ton of value in a network optimization thread.

+1

 

[NigelB]

The improvements I heard from improving the power to my router were surprisingly easy to hear. I can’t explain why, but It would seem that the better we’ve done at reducing noise affecting our system, the more that a router can be heard to be having an effect. I wish that wasn’t the case.

Absolutely agreed, Kenny. Everything counts. If you were to improve the power to your router before, say, installing a good switch then its difference would have been masked by what is (or is not) happening downstream. But once you've sorted the big hitter = switch, upstream tweaks are far more likely to give meaningful improvements in sound quality. Nice work.

 

[agisthos]

I created a 'router optimization' thread, to be a bit more specific.

 

[NigelB]

You did indeed! Many thanks.

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/router-optimization-for-audio-quality.41294/

 

[enzo1]

I’ve tested the following switches:

Nordost Qnet – quite neutral, detailed, expensive, as it requires powering from a separate Qsource power supply (with the stock switching power supply it performs much weaker).

Innuos Phoenix Switch – heavily colored, average resolution. If we need strong “coloring” already at the network stage, it might work, but in my opinion there are better options.

Matrix SS-1 and SS-1 Pro – very good switches, it’s better to go for the Pro version – it’s superior, well-priced, with very reliable sound.

SR UEF Switch – good dynamics, tone, fluidity. The MkII version has better dynamics and resolution – it’s worth using the best possible power cable. The standard Foundation SX cable is fine, but the switch performs much better with a higher-grade cable.