Is optical mostly a waste of time versus Ethernet?

@fredrik222

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. What you explain clearly in layman’s terms is appreciated. There are alot here on Audiogon who may be proficient at what we are proficient at while enjoying the audio hobby which is admittedly not our day job.

With that said, there is still alot that we collectively don’t fully understand when it comes to optimal sound quality over ethernet. Obviously we are only dealing with “the last few feet”, much like we do with power delivery, and no two home systems/rooms/environments are identical. How much noise are we trying to reduce/eliminate and how much noise do we accidentally introduce to the digital chain?

When it comes to ethernet cables in general, ethernet switches and noise, it shouldn’t make a material difference, said my right brain for many years. In fact, even if it made a material difference was it always a positive or a negative difference and if so/not, why?

I heard a positive difference when I inserted the Ether Regen into my chain. I heard a further positive improvement when I inserted Audioquest ethernet cables in place of those provided by my IT expert. While he may not be at your level, I’ve never had a financial transaction fail to successfully complete with those cables but I clearly heard a positive difference. Now, with my Network Acoustics switch, further sonic improvements were clearly heard. Same goes for the Network Acoustics Muon ethernet cable and Muon filter. Even though you may not believe it could possibly make such a positive difference, could I respectfully ask that you suspend disbelief for a moment and help me understand why it would/could?

Could it be the difference between the requirement for a steady stream vs the obvious advantages associated with simply arriving at the identical sum on both ends of a financial transaction? For instance, if the stream had a 20ms silent lag per second, that wouldnt affect a financial transaction but it likely would with streamed music. I don’t deny that its comparing apples to oranges but I know what I am hearing is vastly improved over an already highly satisfactory musical presentation. The conundrum for most here is that the logical side ouf our brain agrees completely with you. How could any of this make a difference but it does to those who have experimented.

@ghasley there you are wrong. Optimal audio quality over a IP network is fully understood by people like me. Do you again believe the banking is comprised daily? Or do you think super hi res simulcast concerts don’t know what they are doing? Look at Ravenna for instance.

The only potential issue is that noise from a short run Ethernet screws up a horribly implemented networking card, and if you remove that noise you could notice a difference. That premise means your super high end streamers use crap components, and that something like Etherregen removes noise. Well, noise is measurable  and it doesn’t remove any noise at all. While I am sure that lots of manufacturers use bad components, but even todays bad components, are very good at handling bad noise environments. 
 

How could any of this make a difference but it does to those who have experimented.

OTOH, that is not true for everyone.  I have tried a number of these things with results being so subtle as to question whether there is really a difference.  It's not that I summarily dismiss the possibility that this stuff can make a sonic difference, but, at least in my room with my equipment, none of this stuff so far has made an easily identifiable change or improvement. 

Everyone is talking about noise which has merit, but what about clocking and jitter. Seems this is the most important thing relating to clarity no one talks about.  faster and more precise clocking chips which seem to have Great impact on sonic performance.  Dacs do their own reclockin but when what they get is in better shape it really helps I guess.

So does anybody know anything about clocking? And also Basic network switches allow the data gate to remain open at a constant rate, ie 100 mbs.  Versus an audio file switch which better controls for the lower dataflow needs which is closer to 5 to 10 Mbs, which limits the transfer of noise I guess. Not sure how this exactly happens.

@jumia 

You are correct, better clocking and jitter control are equally as important. Once again, its one of those things in the hobby that once you hear it, or better stated, once you "don't hear" the negative effects of noise/clocking/jitter is when there are some rather obvious aha moments.

These debates don't really change the thinking of either "camp". Those who have experienced positive effects are considered converts or ill-informed (depending on who is doing the considering). Those who are certain there is nothing to be gained from the effort, gain nothing by not going through the effort. Hey, maybe there is nothing to solve in their system. I do, respectfully, disagree with @fredrik222 because I have experienced the positive effects of certain cables, switches, etc and I have also experienced no effect from some while others actually adversely impact the quality of the sound. It doesn't make anyone right or wrong, it does however make you think a little about how so many rational people can be on opposite sides of topic.

​​​​​​@fredrik222 is right, maybe "my budget" system required some assistance whereas his system is fully fleshed out. Who knows? It would help us all get better performance if people like @fredrik222 would list his gear. I dont typically list mine because it is always changing slightly and I dont want to embarrass myself.