Relationship between Ethernet Switch and SQ

This one will probably invite some withering mockery, but I will ask....

I only stream, and my streamer (Bryston BDP) is fed with an ethernet cable that runs back to my router.  Literally back to my router; there are enough output jacks on the router that I have a long run to the streamer and no ethernet switch in the chain (or the house system for that matter).   (There is an Eno filter right before the streamer).

I happen to OWN a nice LHY ethernet switch.  I am assuming that there is no reason to use it in this configuration, that is, assuming there are noisier switches, and less noisy switches, there is still no net benefit of adding any switch to this chain.  But maybe, just maybe, in the metaphysics of electrons that I do not understand, there is some reason why a nice switch prior to the streamer accomplishes something (in theory...I get that I can A/B test and try to fool myself whether I can hear a difference).  For the first person with a correct answer, I will mail a nice $600 switch to the address you specify! (JK)


You didn’t say what kind of router you’re using, in any case; Routers are known to emit noise. Even though you’re using a very high quality filter from ENO, a combination of ENO + LHY may yield to a better listening experience. You loose nothing by trying… I would insert LHY between your router and ENO with a high quality Link Up Cat 8 LAN cable from Amazon. 

Please report back your findings. 

It all depends how deep down the rabbit hole you want to go. If you're considering inserting an audiophile switch, where currently a switch isn't actually needed, I'd say you'd have to replace the CAT 5 cables with audiophile CAT 5 cables for the synergy it may provide. You wouldn't want any improvement from the switch limited by inferior cables...

No one will be able to give you an absolute answer. I would think that any answer will probably be laced with unproven pseudoscience (like my answer).

Bottom line is whatever helps you sleep at night...

You may either invest in upgraded switches and networking or higher quality streamers. If you love fiddling with the technology you can do the internet thing, otherwise the better streamer the better the sound regardless of the network. I have and know of a number of $150K systems plugged into wifi extenders costing $59 and cheap routers.

Ultimately you can improve up to the intrinsic level of your streamer by fiddling with the network. However at some point a better streamer is required to go further. 

@lalitk It is an anclient Linksys EA 4200, but I have an ifi iPower supply on it and another one on the modem.  LMK is you think there are measurable gains to make in that department.  I had considered a new more powerful router for sake of non-audio network performance in the house, but I vaguely recall reading that doing so may be a net negative on audio noise.

On the CAT 8, a clear limitation I have is that I am using ancient CAT5 that runs under the floor and in the wall - probably not changeable without major impact.  But I can choose to just run nice new cable across the floor for listening - at least when my wife is not around (I do not have a dedicated audio room).  In fact, that is reason enough to add the switch! (Premium cable on the floor for serious listening, hidden cable if I want the room to look tidy for guests or whatever).

@ghdprentice  Would appreciate more guidance on the streamer.  I have always used Bryston BDPs (currenly a 2) because that is what I am familiar with from way back when.  Blunt, low feature devices, but with Bryston's reputation on build quality and the singular purpose of making and passing on a quiet digital audio signal, I have always suspected that they probably hold up pretty well from a SQ standpoint.  I'm talking AES/EBU - USB is another rabbit hole I do not want to mess with again anytime soon, and I suspect newer tech would be better.  But I have never tested another streamer.

You will likely get almost as many different opinions as responses.

Mine is, you could do a bunch of stuff and buy a bunch of stuff but, unless you have a noticeable noise issue, you will be hard-pressed to hear a difference from the changes being discussed here, particularly since you are already using the ENO in front of your streamer.    No harm trying your LHY switch just after the router and listening for whether you can hear a difference.

After reading the responses, I am curious about the difference between CAT 5 cable and “audiophile” CAT 5 cable. If I were to guess, the biggest difference would be the price.

@lalitk I should have had a little more confidence in my ability to listen critically.  The LHY, I am reasonably confident, is a net negative.  The music sounds just a tiny bit more thin and shrill.  So, nice new cable run across the floor straight into the Eno seems to be next, and curious what additional feedback I get on streamer and router.  As @ghdprentice says, I would suspect that streamer is the most important part, though I am not clear on how to best figure out how to get lift over the Bryston.  I don't care about a lot of features, just SQ.  


Thanks for providing more info on your router. By eliminating cheap stock wall warts, you have already improved performance of your router and modem. For now, just hold off to upgrading the router and streamer and work with what you’ve got on hand. I like the idea of choosing a CAT 8 cable for serious listening. Link Up Cat 8 cable is a very nice high quality cable with an option to return if you don’t hear an improvement. I’m currently using an 22AWG version which is bit stiff ahead of a $5K switch from my modem. The 26AWG version (blue) is lot more flexible.

Try it with LHY, let it settle down in your system before forming any opinion. If you feel there is no net gain then trying a better streamer from Aurender or Innuous would be the next step. They have many offerings, pick one up based on your budget.


I have lots of experience with non-dedicated streaming and dedicated. For dedicated: Auralic Aries G2, Aurender (N100, N10, W20SE), Grimm, Linn at several levels… and, more casually, others. My rule of thumb is to match investments in all your electronic components. So if your preamp and amp are about $5K… then start your research for a streamer at $5K. In general, I have found them to pretty much sound better in proportional to their cost (but I am picking highly reviewed and the cream of the crop at that price range).


Unquestioningly I recommend Aurrender. I have two… an N100 and a W20SE. Kind of the top and bottom of their line up. There is no way you will go wrong buying one. They have a very highly regarded controller app for your iPad… they even have it for the iPhone… but a phone is small.

The Aurrender is built from the ground up assuming you have a terrible network and isolate you from it, they require very little band width and work well if WiFi extenders. No network fiddling required… but, LUMIX, Aurlic, Grimm make good streamers as well. Just do your research and don’t go cheap on the streamer and you don’t have to become a IT guru to get world class audiophile sound from streaming.


I was an IT guy since the early 1980’s… I do not want to be any more.

@mathiasmingus I tried the switch, a cheap one, between the router and the streamer, and I didn’t like the change in sound quality. I have also used Network Acoustics Eno Streaming System (filter and a 1m Ethernet cable). With and without the switch. Again the sound quality without the switch in the chain is what I preferred. 
I eventually sold the Eno and opted for just a good Ethernet cable, a Purist Audio Design Cat7. 

The LinkUp Ethernet cable from Amazon suggested by @lalitk is a solid recommendation. If you embark on the tweaks journey all that does, IMO, is create clutter and a spaghetti of wires, with questionable, if any, improvements…if you’re lucky. I’m of the mindset that investing in a better component (DAC and streamer) will give you a much better ROI than dumping $ into tweaks. 

I also had a 30’ Ethernet cable to my streamer. CAT 6a from Blue Jeans, so a little step up from your CAT 5. I swapped it out for fiber to isolate my streamer and it was an improvement. Bonus feature is that the fiber is so thin that it conceals well, you might be able to leave it in place. There is a long discussion in this forum on what you need to buy, and it is in the neighborhood of $100, to try it out. 

It took me a while to figure out digital. Contributing to the confusion were the IT professionals who don’t understand streaming. They spend their lives in the corporate world where dropping a bit in a $Billion transaction would be really bad. So all files are transferred with error checking protocol that won’t let the transfer complete until verified identical.

This isn’t fast enough for streaming so error checking goes out the window, replaced by "error correction" meaning that if a bit is dropped, some value between the 2 adjoining bits is chosen (interpolation). still sounds smooth and is just peachy for consumer stereo, but not good enough for us OCD listners who call ourselves "audiophiles’.

So we have to do everything we can to avoid dropping bits IN REAL TIME.

So back to the question. When an IT professional tells you that you are wasting money buying anything more than a name brand $40 switch, such as the ubiquitous Netgear 5 port, thank him very much smile, and tell him you’ll run out and get one right away....because he doesn’t understand the problem and there is no use arguing with him.

So streamers, clocks, power supplies, and audiophile switches are ways we endeavor to avoid dropped bits. I’m currently using an EtherRegen but considering upgrading.


Hello @mathiasmingus You are getting good advice here from@lalitk and @ghdprentice.

I have gleaned much from these two over the past two years.  I am in the camp of everything matters AND I don't like clutter.

First, the streamer is very important.  How anyone can appreciate the increase in quality of more expensive amps dacs and speakers, yet say streamers don't matter is ridiculous; they do.  Anyone here who has moved up the chain can corroborate that.  And, as ghd says, the better the streamer the less the upstream gear matters. But I differ some here and feel it still does matter.

A quality switch, with a quality power supply inserted between your router and streamer does improve my system.  Since I split my audio feeds to two nice systems, I actually need a switch.  So in my office (away from my audio systems), I am now using a JCAT M12 gold switch with nice LPS to feed those systems.  I also have long runs of ethernet, roughly 25 and 30 feet.  I can run cables through the floor, drop ceiling and either back up into the family room or down the wall to by basement system.

I formerly used Supra Cat 8, but recently (on @lalitk's suggestion), tried the Link UP 22g Cat 8.  It is reasonable from Amazon and easily returnable.  I ran it on the floor and down the stairs first, and could easily swap cables. I liked the Link UP better and ran it through the wall / ceiling. Thanks @lalitk.

I also use a Network Acoustics filter, in my case the Muon Pro.  It (as @ghdprentice says) makes less difference with a quality streamer, but I still think it improves and smooths things.  My streamer is the Grimm MU1 and my DAC is the Tambaqui.  But I keep the switch and its power supply in my office by my router (no clutter).

I think you tried a great thing with the wrong switch.  I have tried many, and the sub $1000 switches did not impress.  I do not know yours, but the English Electric  / Bonn 8 / EtherRegen / Netgear are examples.

I would look at, save for and try the Network Acoustics Tempus.  AT $4000 it includes its own power supply and definitely improved my system when I had it on trial.  Or, the GTT Switch X is also fantastic, and addresses network noise by creating a separate clean network.  I expect it will be back in my home soon to stay.

Routers do create noise, network traffic in your home creates noise.  Anyone who says they don't hear any noise probably has not listened to a good system with these upgrades.  When I put in a great switch, it is not like 'oh there is less noise'. Rather it is 'wow, the soundstage has expanded, the individual voices or instruments are clearly more separated, the image is more focused, and yes the background is blacker'.

Everything matters, and I don't like clutter!

Happy Holidays!!  Ken



... This isn’t fast enough for streaming so error checking goes out the window, replaced by "error correction" meaning that if a bit is dropped, some value between the 2 adjoining bits is chosen (interpolation) ... So streamers, clocks, power supplies, and audiophile switches are ways we endeavor to avoid dropped bits ...

What streaming service are you using? I can tell you that Qobuz uses the TCP/IP protocol, so the end user should get a bit-perfect transfer. It takes very little network speed for Qobuz to work and even at hi-res, 10 mbps should be enough. Remember that your streamer will load content from a service such as Qobuz into a cache, so if there is an error in transmission, there’s more than enough time for the packet to be resent. Interpolation isn’t part of the protocol - at least not for Qobuz over TCP/IP.

@cleeds do all streamers cache? Let’s not confuse caching with buffering…I’m asking about caching. 


Let’s not confuse caching with buffering…I’m asking about caching.

If you want to be precise, what a streamer really does is load the file into a buffer. It’s really a difference without a distinction, though. You’re getting a bit perfect file from a source such as Qobuz because the data is sent in packets over TCP/IP with error correction and no interpolation, contrary to your claim.

You haven’t identified your streaming source and I suppose it’s possible that you’re not getting bit perfect files from your provider. Which service are you using?

Thanks @lalitk and @fastfreight for the Link UP ethernet cable recommendation. I’ve been looking for something good but reasonably priced since I’m just using free cat five cables for now. 



Thanks for your comments. I think you did a good job of capturing the nuances of reality. There is a trade off between investing in a very good streamer and also upgrading network components. I have one of the finest streamers… adding a EtherRegen does not improve the sound quality at all. But it does improve the sound in lessor streamers, as will fancy routers. The trick is figuring out the optimal mixture. That will depend on how resolving the rest of your system is, you financial situation, desire to play with technology… or not. 

@carlsbad2  Enjoy the holidays. 🎄

@cleeds some streamers buffer, some cache. Different technology and design concepts altogether.
Buffering leverages what is typically a small memory area that fills up and outputs data to match the transmission/stream speed. Think of it as your faucet running into a funnel that outputs a stream of data. During that time a lot takes place and it has to take place fast - unpacking the stream, converting it to the signal that your dac would understand, etc.
Caching typically stores the entire result set, in example several albums or a playlist. Caching leverages SSD and varies in capacity. Aurender uses about 240GB of SSD to cache the playlists and albums. Auralic uses about 1GB. When the result is cached, it is a slower process than buffering and yields a better opportunity to process and unpack data slower, using less processing and injecting less garbage into the final result. It essentially downloads the entire album ftom the cloud streaming service and stores it in that cache before sending a much cleaner than buffer data to dac.
Cheaper streamers buffer. Higher end streamers cache. Some higher end streamers buffer but use a healthy buffer area and processing to ensure the data is clean.
What sets the higher end streamers apart from their lower end counterparts is beefier power supplies designed to accommodate larger snd faster processors without taxing the power supplies, larger buffer and caching areas. There are also various means if isolation for LAN and USB inputs/outputs, as well as better clock, etc. Lowering the noise floor and having a clean data output to the dac is key to good sound. So yeah, when people upgrade a SMPS on something like the Node to linear power supply or add an Sbooster LPS to Lumin U1/2 Mini bypassing its SMPS it usually results in better sound due to just lowering the noise floor. 

Adding switches, fiber optic conversion modules, linear power supplies and other similar tweaks will never turn a bluesound node into Grimm MU1. Invest into better quality components.


FYI - Aurender’s operating system is stored and loaded from an SSD, that is also used for the system cache.

Thanks so much for all the food for thought.  I did not think I would immediately make a purchase based in this thread...but I did.  It may surprise you (for those who care to read on), but I include my reasons.  I bought …..another Bryston(!) - a BDP3.  Reasoning (following a moderate amount of research):


  1. I like the BDP2, and the BDP3 should provide some sonic uplift.
  2. My system has moved from silver to black - replacing a silver 2 with a black 3.
  3. The Bryston user interface is terrible - web based, and similar to a 1982 personal computer.
  4. ,,,which means a lot of people steer clear based on the interface.  But I am very comfortable with it at this point, including all the configuration details, and it is very reliable.
  5. Research generated a largely consistent message of: BDP3 is underrated, excellent SQ (cruddy interface).
  6. I just run AES/EBU.  For USB, I’m sure an Innuos Zenith Mk 3 + Phoenix (and certain other high-end gear mentioned here) would likely exceed. 
  7. Very clean unit negotiated for $2350 used (plus tax and shipping). 
  8. Great company with great build quality and support.
  9. 2 or 3 years from now, digital will likely have advanced again - I will reassess after having good sound at good value for a few more years.


So that’s what I did! Somebody may argue that was a poor play for some reason, but not much lost if so.  Thanks again for your input!


@mathiasmingus congrats on the purchase! The BDP3 if my memory serves is Roon ready. I’d give that a shot for the free trial period and compare the sound quality of Manic Moose vs. Roon. I’ve seen the Bryston software and I am pretty sure Roon is leaps and bounds better. Worth every penny especially when contrasted against the Moose. 

@lalitk thanks…didn’t know that. 

@audphile1 Oh yes, BDPs are Roon ready and I am a Roon user.  (Again with configuration details that may throw the unitiated).  I have not critically compared whether the Moose may sound better - I believe at least one person suggested so.  Which leads to the topic for another thread - I am DONE with Windows 11!  I used a dedicated Windows 11 laptop as my Roon core, and after the last Roon update, I have not been able to get Roon and Windows Defender to cooperate.  Enough.  Bought a used Roon nucleus which is in transit! And LPS to accompany.

Cheaper streamers buffer. Higher end streamers cache. Some higher end streamers buffer but use a healthy buffer area and processing to ensure the data is clean.

What streamer are you using, @audphile1 ? What streaming service are you using that "isn’t fast enough for streaming so error checking goes out the window, replaced by ’error correction’ meaning that if a bit is dropped, some value between the 2 adjoining bits is chosen (interpolation) "?

You can fiddle with power supplies on your streamer all you want, but you’re likely to get much greater improvement by looking at your streaming service and cleaning up whatever network problems are contributing to your dropped bits.

Meanwhile, I think @mathiasmingus made a great choice in the Bryston BDP-3. I dumped an Aurender for the Bryston and have never been happier. Yes, the interface is crude and some people just can't get passed that. But it's a terrific streamer.


Congratulations on upgrading to BDP 3. At the end of the day, your comfortability and enjoyment is all that matters. 

Cleeds is correct, bits are bits if you have a decent switch. IMO, even a $600 reconfigured Netgear or Cisco “audio grade” switch is a waste of money - no meaningful value added. I’ve just listened to different switches and spoke with too many network engineers to convince me otherwise. If you are trying to increase the speed and reliability of your home network, you have a variety of options. However, with your current system, it is highly unlikely you will hear any improvements in SQ. I’m sure others may disagree. Happy listening and Merry Christmas 

@cleeds I have owned Auralic Aries G1 and Lumin U1 Mini. Currently I am using a network renderer in my DAC (Bricasti M3) as a Roon endpoint (Roon core duties are handled by Mac Mini) without an outboard dedicated streamer. I also occasionally use MConnect to bypass Roon and stream direct from streaming services (Qobuz and Tidal).

The M3 has two toroidal transformers running digital and analog sections of the unit. There’s nothing ti fiddle with and I don’t have any plans to do so. The point I was trying to make is it all depends on the design and implementation. There are excellent streamers that utilize buffering and equally good sounding units that leverage caching. 

Here’s the M3 with its hood popped (this isn’t my unit, pic from hifi news). 

Hello,my personal experience with a Bell router is…..Heimdall 2 Ethernet cable to Synergistic Research switch… to Muon Pro filter …. To Aqua LinQ streamer …. To Weiss 501 DAC. This combination is an amazingly level of no audible noise resulting in hours of no fatigue 🎶 .

@audphile1 I gathered that you dropped your Eno filter from the chain.  When I got mine, I did a very cursory test, detected little difference, and assumed it must be helpful.  I am reminded to go back and do a serious A/B and see if it is a net improvement or not.  Potentially even less clutter, a la @fastfreight!

Yes the Eno is gone. I actually had it for a while and concluded I didn’t need it. 
With it in my system the sound became a bit too mellow. I heard that their Muon is more dynamic and more resolving but I’m not planning to spend $2200 on the network filter when it can be invested into other more impactful links in the audio reproduction chain. 

@mathiasmingus, I run two fairly inexpensive network switches in cascade between my CAT6 router and my ENO Filter System AG before my always to be ridiculed and mocked on this forum with derision Roon Nucleus music server, where the switches are powered by iFi Elite X SMPS units. For me the proof was in the listening. If you put a switch in your listening chain and things sound smoother and less digital, then keep it there for awhile. If not no biggie. 

@iseland cab you expand? You are suggesting convering IP data at the router and then back again, similar to the isolation approach in this (I think now relativelhy well known) video?


Fiber optics implementation is quite the opposite of a clutter free setup. Unless your router/modem and streamer offers fiber optic connectivity, you are simply creating clutter for minimal gains. IMHO, The Network Acoustics ENO and ENO Pro are the best passive Ethernet noise filters currently available. 

@lalitk agreed. All you will get is clutter. Add linear power supplies to those fiber optic converters and get even more clutter. I have tried that fiber optic setup with several streamers that accept only copper network cables and actually don’t like the resulting sound. Besides it’s a spaghetti and a mess. I would just get a good Ethernet cable and call it a day. That’s all you really need - neat and organized with improved sound. 


I am using a network renderer in my DAC (Bricasti M3) as a Roon endpoint (Roon core duties are handled by Mac Mini) without an outboard dedicated streamer. I also occasionally use MConnect to bypass Roon and stream direct from streaming services (Qobuz and Tidal).

It seems to me that something is badly amiss if you suffer dropped bits while using that equipment with Qobuz, as you describe below, @audphile1. I'm not a Roon user, so I don't know if maybe that's where your problem is. But you should be getting bit-perfect delivery from Qobuz and if you're not, you be better served by fixing your network issues than anything else. If all of your wiring and connections are tight and secure, you might want to look at that DAC as the culprit.

"isn’t fast enough for streaming so error checking goes out the window, replaced by ’error correction’ meaning that if a bit is dropped, some value between the 2 adjoining bits is chosen (interpolation) "

Man, there is some different opinions. But we all have them.

I am using an EtherRegen in my computer room that converts the ethernet to fiber which then goes to my Lumin X1 in my audio room. Pretty much clutter free.

To me, the fiber was a game changer in sound quality. The music became calmer and more natural. I suppose the transceivers are important. I am using Finisar


@cleeds  ha? Dropped bits? Man who’s saying anything about dropped bits?

I’m talking about difference in sound quality that’s influenced more by a component design and implementation as well as parts quality that impact the sonics more than the network switches, or converting copper to fiber and back to copper, using switches and upgrading power supplies on routers, switches and fiber optic converters. This is the topic of this discussion. Let’s not highjack it.

@ozzy your setup makes sense - using fiber into Lumin that accepts it. One step convert copper to fiber optic and clean up the EMI and RFI on the copper data line. 


there is a very simple answer to your question, and it is the only answer, adding a switch in the chain can only deteriorate, it can never under any circumstance enhance. It is absolutely impossible and anyone telling you differently does not understand the technology.

a good switch only adds a bit of latency, a bad switch can cause frame drops and cause audible issues. that said, the switch needs to be pretty bad to cause issues for streaming services.

and on the topic of streaming, there is no such thing as continues stream, it is a series of downloads into a buffer. Any media over TCP/IP and Ethernet buffers. Regarding caching, at least according to Qobuz all players are supposed to cache, but some manufacturers want to fool their buyers by saving it is a better experience if you don’t cache, but that is just BS.

anyone with foundational knowledge of the topic can verify all of the above with a packet capture. 

@fredrik222 there is no downloading into a buffer. Buffering will let you buffer some data to help manage the data stream to allow other processing to take place. Let’s say for example it will buffer 1.5min or even less of a 5min track. This allows the processing to do what it should be doing. It’s not an uninterrupted stream as t never should be. Typically buffering is done in memory.
Caching on the other hand will cache the entire result set and the streamer will process the data from the cache (much larger solid stare drive or larger memory area). Aurender, for example, leverages a 240GB cache. If you pause in the middle of the playlist that was cached earlier and come back to it an hour later, the same data will continue to reside there until the cache is cleared. The same exact concepts apply on the database either you use SQL, Oracle on premises or Google or AWS in the cloud. When the user runs a query, if caching is enabled, the results will be cached. So that you can run and rerun the same exact data query - the result will be pulled from cache and not from the database again. Unless the criteria changes. With buffering it will always be re-pulled.

But one thing we can finally agree on, you and I, is the addition of switches. In every scenario I ever tried a switch caused degradation in sound quality.

@audphile1 no, you are wrong. Do a packet capture like I said. There is no such thing as a continuous stream, for any media, over the internet. It is just not possible. Buffering doesn’t have to be in memory, especially not when it comes to something so small as an audio stream, but typically it is.

Qobuz still wants the player to cache all tracks, but does not force 3rd party players to do so. You really don’t need to explain caching or buffering to me. 

@audphile1 said:

But one thing we can finally agree on, you and I, is the addition of switches. In every scenario I ever tried a switch caused degradation in sound quality.

I do not think this is generally agreed upon.  Look at the Taiko Switch forum on What’s Best. It is 100% positively received as a great sonic improvement. (It is not actually a switch as it is one in and one out) but obviously expensive and well implemented.  Reports on other quality or modified switches are similar.  My ears report similar…it just (like most components) takes good design and implementation.  I do agree that the better the streamer, the less improvement to be had, but I still hear improvement.

So interesting that no one argues using an amazing set of mono amps sounds better than a stereo amp.  Everything matters, it is just a case of is it worth it to the individual or if they can hear it.

@fastfreight agreed. Everything matters.

Not sure what the Taiko switch is or what it is doing for $5,200 (technically it isn’t a switch with one in one out), but when we’re talking switches that the average schmucks will implement in their setup, best you can do is hope to not hurt anything. Hey if you get an improvement in the process, you can consider yourself lucky. 

“I do not think this is generally agreed upon”

If one thing we can agreed upon is our collective experiences. There are so many variables in concluding to a viewpoint on the effectiveness of a certain gear in our system. Speaking of @audphile1, maybe he has yet to experience a high end switch like Telegartner or he feels that kind of money best spent on attaining a better gear. We all have our priorities. IMO, tweaking your streaming with a switch should be last priority once you have sorted your DAC and Streamer. I didn’t start playing with switches until I have the base line established. Now that I’ve experienced how a switch like Telegartner elevates SQ in a highly resolve system, I simply cannot live without it. The bar is set so high by this switch that it leaves no desire to tinker with multiple tweaks.


@lalitk yes that’s exactly my point. Based on how you tackled it, with adding the switch as absolutely the last thing, we’re pretty much on the same page.