Sorry to hear that, but I’m not really here to convince you – you have made your decision – but warn others before they use money on useless stuff.
How Ethernet works is not an opinion.
2 Likes
That ASR review is an eye opener. And a possible cash saver. I have just received a couple of Netgear switches as I am now running direct from Airport Extreme to SB Touch and need some extra ports. Would really be interested in trying one of these audiophile switches just to see if they really do make a difference. My ears are probably are way past caring!
As an aside, I am running direct from the Airport to SB now but will now place the switch into the system. Do you think I will “Hear” it?
As I have extra ports on the Airport should I continue to use one direct to the SB and use the switch for my peripherals only?
As I mentioned about. All the magic works only with audio 
1 Like
To be fair, what’s in John Swenson’s article that you linked to is also only his opinion until he provides some independently repeatable, objective, real-world data to support it - as I understand it, there is none so far. For me, the only convincing data would involve measuring differences in the output from the DAC, because that’s what I’m actually listening to.
2 Likes
No one is forcing you to read it. I for one am enjoying the banter and info being put forward.
1 Like
Yep. I think that about sums it up.
Slip in perceived - right between ‘increases’ and ‘SQ’ - and I’m with you 100%. Well, I’m not, but I’ll happily defend your right to believe it to be true. But there is absolutely no evidence to suggest there is an objective difference in SQ when you swap out a perfectly adequate switch for an ‘audiophile’ one. Until I hear a better argument than ‘my ears are better than your facts’, I’m with @rockphotog, how ethernet works is not an opinion.
3 Likes
how any electronic device works is not an opinion. Is there a point to that comment?
Like most of the naysayers here, the reviewer went into it having already decided what the outcome would be. He states many times on the site that even if he does a hear a difference he doesn’t believe what he hears. He performed a very limited set of tests using a fixed set of frequencies when music is constantly changing both in frequency and amplitude. He used an all in one device for output that cost less than $1000. It was interesting. It was not conclusive.
BTW in case you are interested, I have tried them and decided I could hear no difference so use an off the shelf switch. I don’t think my limited experience makes me an expert though so I am open to the possibility that some do. Just because something can’t be fully explained to your satisfaction does not mean it is not true.
There are many things we don’t understand. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
1 Like
I don’t understand your comment.
Please do tell me where I said or implied this???
I am neither a believer or non believer. All I said was the review was an eye opener. I know very little on the subject so was interested in what he had to say. I have no idea where you seem to be drawing these conclusions from my post. Meanwhile your experiences seem to agree with his.
I often find myself eventually posting this Audio Woo Checklist in threads like this. Enjoy. 
Audio Woo Checklist
attributed to Sean Adams, founder of SlimDevices (Squeezeboxes, Transporter)
You claim that an:
- audible
- measurable
- hypothetical
improvement in sound quality can be attained by:
- upsampling
- increasing word size
- vibration dampening
- bi-wiring
- replacing the external power supply
- using a different lossless format
- decompressing on the server
- removing bits of metal from skull
- using ethernet instead of wireless
- inverting phase
- installing bigger connectors
- installing Black Gate caps
- installing ByBee filters
- installing hospital-grade AC jacks
- defragmenting the hard disk
- running older firmware
Your idea will not work. Specifically, it fails to account for:
- the placebo effect
- your ears honestly aren’t that good
- your idea has already been thoroughly disproved
- modern DACs upsample anyway
- those products are pure snake oil
- lossless formats, by definition, are lossless
- those measurements are bogus
- sound travels much slower than you think
- electric signals travel much faster than you think
- that’s not how binary arithmetic works
- that’s not how TCP/IP works
- the Nyquist theorem
- the can’t polish a turd theorem
- bits are bits
Your subsequent arguments will probably appeal in desperation to such esoterica as:
- jitter
- EMI
- thermal noise
- existentialism
- cosmic rays
And you will then change the subject to:
- theories are not the same as facts
- measurements don’t tell everything
- not everyone is subject to the placebo effect
- blind testing is dumb
- you can’t prove what I can’t hear
- science isn’t everything
Rather than engage in this tired discussion, I suggest exploring the following factors which are more likely to improve sound quality in your situation:
- room acoustics
- source material
- type of speakers
- speaker placement
- crossover points
- equalization
- Q-tips
22 Likes
I inferred from your statement that the ASR review was an eye opener that you agreed with his conclusions…While my elaboration was directed at the naysayers in general and not particularly at you, my apologies if I was incorrect in my inference.
Yes.
A FIFO buffer for in the receiving end solves Swenson’s problem around jitter carried through digital data in the context of Ethernet. The data stacks perfectly for a short moment, now true digital and not analog voltage on a wire. All timing, even unwanted, is forgot in the buffer. So there is no timing information left, not even unwanted.
So, there is no problem to solve.
That is my point. It is not my opinion.
What is my opinion is that if your (asynchronous) Ethernet connected streamer with DAC permits jitter of any kind, you should replace it before looking for an EtherREGEN.
6 Likes
In the Kingdom of Audiophile Heaven there are only believers. Heretics who worship the false gods like bits and 1’s and 0’s will never gain admission or know the truth.
I have to declare that SoTM’s design goals of producing a good sounding switch by reducing noise has been a resounding success. Musical textures are more interesting notes have more air and decay. In some cases more image height and slightly deeper soundstage. For fun I put in my old Netgear consumer switch. I immediately had to take it out. So here we have some careful considerations to make. I can’t speak to the $1000 plain Jane sNH-10G but this upgraded version with the upgraded clock sounds much better than the 398 Euro (around $456 USD at time of writing) Aqvox Switch 8 which in turn sounds much better than a consumer Linksys switch. Is it $1200 better? That is hard to say. Myself, I think this is a special product and worthy of consideration.
Wow, great word salad. I look forward to understanding the careful considerations that need to be made. Because I think they are going to be key to us receiving the ultimate SQ improvements from these devices peddled by con merchants.
Just to declare a conflict of interest here, I have a Netgear switch, and I never need to take it out. SMFH.
2 Likes
The value of a network switch is that it connects devices on a computer network by using packet switching to receive and forward data to the destination device.
The Value of a audiophile network switch is the gross margin between the manufacturing costs and the sales price and that value goes to the vendor. There may be some psychoacoustics “value*” depending on the listener.
*mojo, happiness of new gear
1 Like
And that’s where you are wrong.
Audiophile switches shape the ones and zeros to be ONES and ZEROS, super BITS in super PACKETS.
After that they get switched in sequence by a very precise clock to arrive in the buffer of the connected streamer, they get processed.
The BITs are processed very precise, because of the “atom” clock in the switch to be changed into a super detailed analogue signal.
You get this super detailed sound, no you get superb sound quality, because of the super bits, sorry super BITS, you feed your DAC by using the very innovative, thus expansive, switch.
Superpowers to the ONES and ZEROS because ones and zeros are not the ones that sound good.
1 Like
LOL!!! 
OK, now I understand and if I buy both products from SOtM:
"There would be no single product which removes noise completely, but they can help reduce noise and improve sound quality, so even though the sNH-10G and iSO-CAT6 have good quality filtering technology on their own, if they can be used together , the synergy is better than using only one filter and brings better results. "
Then I will not just get ONES and ZEROS… I will get ONES and ZEROS, super BITS in super PACKETS. Right?
Yes, that’s right.
Because washing ones and zeros to be ONES and ZEROS is a costly process, these switches are so expansive.
1 Like
So with audiophile switch you get:
01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110011 01110100 00100000 01100001 01110111 01100101 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101 00100000 01110011 01101111 01110101 01101110 01100100 00100000 01100101 01110110 01100101 01110010
2 Likes
No, all wrong… you get:
01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110011 01110100 00100000 01100001 01110111 01100101 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101 00100000 01110011 01101111 01110101 01101110 01100100 00100000 01100101 01110110 01100101 01110010
Which is as you can see MUCH better.
2 Likes
What I don’t quite understand is if your reducing noise in the switch and you may only have a server, network and maybe streamer why does it have so many ports?
Surely more equipment means more generated noise?