This is because there are analog tweaks and audiophile products for analog that DO work, or at least have some chance of improving sound quality. There are analog audiophiles trying their hand at digital using the same approach, not understanding it’s not the same type of system.
6 Likes
The reality is a bit more nuanced…
Unlikely marketing claims notwithstanding, there are mechanisms where digital transmission of data to the DAC may influence the analogue output. Processing the incoming data can modulate power supply rails and ground plane. A good design will mitigate the effects. Not all DACs are good designs. Similarly, wired Ethernet connection should be galvanically isolated, but if you use shielded cables you are coupling the ground of your DAC to the next piece of equipment up the chain, which may be electrically noisy, may create ground loops, and may affect the analogue output. Again, a good design (and correct choice of cabling) will mitigate the effects. Not all DACs are good designs.
Some of the ‘audiophile’ network ‘stuff’ might change the sound of a less good design; some might even make it less bad. I suspect none of it is a substitute for a proper understanding of what’s actually wrong and a rational engineering solution.
And yes, I’m aware this is a gross oversimplification.
5 Likes
And there we have the absolute opposite point of view
Well, no we don’t…
Perhaps Amir is testing using a DAC that is not susceptible to network-bourne problems (very likely); perhaps the EtherREGEN doesn’t live up to its marketing claims (even more likely). The test results are what I might expect given the methodology.
To be clear, I wouldn’t recommend the EtherREGEN either; but I don’t thing think Amir’s test conclusively ‘proves’ anything.
That reply astounds me. The “quality” of the feed really doesn’t matter in this respect, as long as its received.
Quality of Audio is a different beast. Its not numbers on a spreadsheet, its to create the minute detail in audio . Audiophiles astound me, so many are into it but hate it at the same time.
Audiophile Style is full of the most faithful. The really long, long, long (hundreds of pages IIRC) thread about digital tweaks states as its rule, in a sticky post, that people are not allowed to express skepticism or ask for any scientific approach. It is simply about belief.
There is some really good content there, no doubt. But if it was about world-view rather than digital audio, it would be a cult.
Edit: I LOVE that review on Audiophile Style. Here’s my favorite passage: “The individual sections of the chorus were more precise, with more depth. Individual voices in the chorus were easier to distinguish. Brass instruments - trumpets, trombones, and tuba - in particular were much more realistic, with more texture and air volume.”
The proverbial “veil lifted.” We must be some suckers, listening to this veiled, dull music without all those network tweaks.
The review was by the guy who posted the rules I refer to above. So, no surprise he loved something that disassembles the data and reassembles it, just as it was. This was the same guy who posted a request for Roon to release a memory-playback version of Roon, then got upset and left this forum when people asked him to test his hypothesis before getting behind his suggestion.
I guess the name says it all: Audiophile STYLE. We all know what is considered the “opposite” of style, but I guess a website called Audiophile SUBSTANCE wouldn’t attract as many. (That said, I do not mean to be critical of that forum overall…there is a lot of great information there and I built my first audio PCs based on their designs…there are tons of great content…but those tweakers-on-faith…uggh.)
Double Edit: You really have to read this review. I love it where he chains 3 switches together for maximum quality!
1 Like
It is a cult.
1 Like
As is this thread and its superior sarcasm, frequently spouted by those who have no practical experience of the devices themselves.
1 Like
So trumpets, trombones and tubas have more air volume, presumably because they are driven by air, but violins, cellos, and the like don’t because their sound only travels thru the air.
Let that be a lesson to those who believe that switches negatively effect SQ.
I dig ALL reviews, purely for the imaginative descriptions.
Yeah, without reading the review, I remember that guy.
Some useful advice (in red) from the site -
1 Like
I got as far as this in the review, and then decided not to spend too much time on it.
I’ve made it a habit to burn in review gear for a minimum of 200 hours before even attempting to evaluate its sound quality. In the case of the eR, I was very glad I did, because it most definitely needs burn-in. The bulk of the change happens in the first 24-48 hours, but my unit continued to improve for several more days.
I take it that there was no double-blind testing involved?
No, just the blind leading the blind as usual over on that site.
That’s…just…crazy. There is some small chance that in the analog world, burn-in might be a thing. With a network switch, that is just…ok I’ve said enough on that point.
Please. We have tons of practical experience with network switches and other network gear. I was into digital audio the month after MP3s were a thing at all and have been doing digital audio networks for 25 years (I remember buying a $1400 1GB SCSI drive and a $500 Ulstra-2-wide adapter because IDE drives had to “thermally recalibrate” and could not keep the CDR write buffer full); I’ve used dozens of pieces of network gear and I know what makes a difference and what doesn’t.
And I don’t have to sacrifice a goat to know that it won’t make the volcano stop erupting.
When facts, logic, and measurements — of the alleged noise transmitted by non-audiophile ethernet switches and cables — are ignored, all that’s left is sarcasm.
A volcano? In Chicago? 
It’s also worth noting that UpTone is a sponsor/advertiser at Audiophile Style. I’m skeptical that a negative or even neutral review of the EtherREGEN would be published on that site.
Sarcasm is one of those audio effects that cannot be measured. It can only be detected by the trained ear on a system that is so resolving that it can pick up even the slightest noise received by those pesky ethernet cables when they are acting as antennae for those super sensitive switches.
You assume too much too often.
Regarding the EtherREGEN, would a listening test would be good enough? or just reading the reviews? or just speculate based on your past (professional) experiences on the digital networking?
I’ve read that, but I am not totally convinced by those arguments, because there are no listening tests with discerning DACs, just a bunch of numbers which mean nothing (to me).