Network Switches

@almarg I have said this before but you choose to ignore common sense and continue to spew techo-babble.

Your arguments assume that the ethernet signal as received by your audiophile switch is perfect and that your audiophile switch will transmit the signal to your DAC perfectly, counteracting (your words)...

 " interactions involving ostensibly unrelated signals and circuitry, including interactions involving circuitry that is downstream of the Ethernet interface in the DAC or other receiving component. Interactions that are dependent on the spectral composition of the signal waveforms on the Ethernet link, which in turn can be presumed to vary significantly as a function of the characteristics of the particular switch and its power supply".

The fact is that this signal has passed through hundreds of routers, repeaters, data centers, and switches prior to arriving at your router.  Are we to understand that all those networking devices have had no effect on the signal, thus allowing that signal to arrive at your digital doorstep in pristine condition?  Are we to further understand that the only place deterioration of the signal can occur is within the final switch and hence that switch needs to be a magical audiophile switch.

Your whole argument sounds like the same pseudo-scientific verbiage used to describe other incredibly overpriced nonsense products that plague hi-end audio.  

@jnorris20025, Almarg is the last person here who you'd want to accuse of spewing techno-babble. 

@jason_k2017, are you suggesting that what you're hearing is exactly as it was encoded? That your DAC is perfect? 

All the best,
Nonoise

@nonoise

@jason_k2017, are you suggesting that what you're hearing is exactly as it was encoded? That your DAC is perfect?

The one thing I do know is that if you decode an encoded stream in a quality DAC with the the same codec with which it was encoded then it will be as near to perfect as anything else I can throw at my sound system. My turntable (which is no longer used) is not perfect, my CD player is not perfect, my DB receiver is not perfect. Nor are yours. None are

You should read up a little on codecs, digitzation and the capablilities and limitations of the human ear. There is a point at which nobody can detect an changes to audio. If you can't grasp that, think of your eyes instead and why film only needs only to be at 24 frames per second and why you have to be reasonably young to see any difference between 1080 and 4K TV

@jason_k2017,
I can grasp lots of things, thank you, I do so by keeping an open mind.
Even at my ripe old age of 65 my eyes can still see the difference between 1080 and 4K TV on a decent set up (that was one bad analogy, by the way).

All the best,
Nonoise

+1, @nonoise. 
I see that @jnorris2005 still trying to convince us with the same old analogy of signal passing through hundreds of routers, repeaters, data centers...blah blah.

It’s the same signal / data sent to each subscriber yet our experiences differs, why....because how we choose to decode that incoming signal in the comfort of our homes. What these naysayers failed to understand is this, the same identical signal or data stream sent to his or my home results in different aural experience based on our choice of electronics. In jnorris whimsical world a $5K streamer/DAC shouldn’t sound any different than $40 Google Chromecast streaming device because we are dealing with a same digital signal, basically 1’s and 0’s.

In a digital chain everything matters.

Let’s take the 4K analogy, why does X brand of TV able to display the identical 4K stream better than Y brand of TV. It’s all in implementation and how we choose to decode that incoming audio or video signal.