(16-Aug-2017, 19:39)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for that K4680. So if I am interpreting this correctly, this is not passive filtering per Antoine's concerns. (Note that Antoine did not say it was passive filtering, he was simply concerned it might be) It simply allows the data through unhindered, whilst offering complete isolation from spurious electrical noise and grounding. Please correct me someone if I have got this wrong!
So if I have got this right, it cirtainly cannot do anything negative, and if electrical noise or grounding are an issue in a system, the issue is eliminated.
Hello Confused, this is so ok!
An extract from the data sheet:
Network insulators of the type EMOSAFE EN-30 interrupt any metal-conducting connection between devices that are connected to each other via a copper-guided Ethernet cabling. They prevent potential leakage currents and protect connected devices and their users from transient overvoltages, which can be coupled directly, capacitively or inductively into the network line due to installation faults, lightning strikes, switching operations, electrostatic discharges.
3 APPLICATIONS
3.1 PATIENT PROTECTION
Galvanic separation of the Ethernet interfaces from medical electrical devices or systems, in which patients must be protected against hazardous leakage currents in accordance with standard requirements.
3.2 EQUIPMENT PROTECTION
Protection of particularly valuable equipment against hum and overvoltage from the network periphery.
3.3 TECHNOLOGY
Protection of electrical measuring and monitoring devices against external and interference voltages from the Ethernet cabling.
3.4 AUDIO
Reduction of low-frequency alternating voltages (mains ripples), which are caused by the network connection, to an extent which is no longer perceptible.
Does not high frequency noise travel through the isolation transformers in a ethernet connection hence the need for filters like the ones in a Etalon. I suppose they use some sort of capacitor and choke to filter out common mode noise for example.
[
attachment=2243]
(16-Aug-2017, 17:44)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]Is anyone clear regarding how these things work? I am assuming that they do serve a purpose because otherwise industrial and medical versions would not exist. However, taking the earlier thought of using the device with AIR, here packet data is sent to the Devialet which then buffers the data to internal memory, with the buffered data then leaving the buffer to do whatever Devialet AIR does to provide music. So I am assuming that any noise in the Ethernet feed cannot be stored in the buffer to influence the actual data that is stored, then emerges out of the buffer. So is it a case of simply keeping any electrical interference or noise away from the Devialet Ethernet port?
That said, personally I do prefer the idea of something like the Etalon rather than stuff like the Intona, if only because the Intona introduces the need for additional LPSU's or similar. That said I also note Antoine's earlier comments regarding it being a good idea to avoid passive filtering in the digital domain.
Fascinating stuff, but somewhat confusing! I know a lot of people have reported good results with network isolation, so I think there has to be some benefits, maybe it's one of those things that work for reasons 'not yet fully understood' in the world of digital audio.
Anyway, I will certainly be interested to read Guillaume's observations of this one.
Hi Confused
Actually, the Intona doesn't require any power supply, but takes power from whatever it is connected to.
Alex.
(17-Aug-2017, 02:18)Axel Wrote: [ -> ] (16-Aug-2017, 17:44)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]Is anyone clear regarding how these things work? I am assuming that they do serve a purpose because otherwise industrial and medical versions would not exist. However, taking the earlier thought of using the device with AIR, here packet data is sent to the Devialet which then buffers the data to internal memory, with the buffered data then leaving the buffer to do whatever Devialet AIR does to provide music. So I am assuming that any noise in the Ethernet feed cannot be stored in the buffer to influence the actual data that is stored, then emerges out of the buffer. So is it a case of simply keeping any electrical interference or noise away from the Devialet Ethernet port?
That said, personally I do prefer the idea of something like the Etalon rather than stuff like the Intona, if only because the Intona introduces the need for additional LPSU's or similar. That said I also note Antoine's earlier comments regarding it being a good idea to avoid passive filtering in the digital domain.
Fascinating stuff, but somewhat confusing! I know a lot of people have reported good results with network isolation, so I think there has to be some benefits, maybe it's one of those things that work for reasons 'not yet fully understood' in the world of digital audio.
Anyway, I will certainly be interested to read Guillaume's observations of this one.
Hi Confused
Actually, the Intona doesn't require any power supply, but takes power from whatever it is connected to.
Alex.
Yes, thanks Alex. I do like to keep things as factual as possible, but my Intona reference was nonsense in this context. So thanks for spotting that. Utter stupidity on my part!
To clarify, what I
meant to say was that prefer the idea of the Etalon in comparison to 'optical bridge' type devices, that is Ethernet to Toslink to Ethernet converters, which do need external power. Of course the Intona is a USB isolation type device, a different thing altogether. Brain fade on my part in my earlier post.
[
attachment=2247]
(17-Aug-2017, 08:58)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]To clarify, what I meant to say was that prefer the idea of the Etalon in comparison to 'optical bridge' type devices, that is Ethernet to Toslink to Ethernet converters, which do need external power. Of course the Intona is a USB isolation type device, a different thing altogether. Brain fade on my part in my earlier post.
I wonder if this is good? Is is certainly practical in use.. link to specs here:
http://www.emosystems.de/wp-content/uplo...EN-85e.pdf
(17-Aug-2017, 12:04)ogs Wrote: [ -> ] (17-Aug-2017, 08:58)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]To clarify, what I meant to say was that prefer the idea of the Etalon in comparison to 'optical bridge' type devices, that is Ethernet to Toslink to Ethernet converters, which do need external power. Of course the Intona is a USB isolation type device, a different thing altogether. Brain fade on my part in my earlier post.
I wonder if this is good? Is is certainly practical in use.. link to specs here: http://www.emosystems.de/wp-content/uplo...EN-85e.pdf
The schematic for the Emosafe looks identical to the one posted yesterday by K4680, in terms of the 'LAN transformer' arrangement at least.
Also note that Antoine mentions the EMO Systems EN70 HD back in post #11.
So very similar in principle, as to how the quality of components / performance compare, I have no idea.
(17-Aug-2017, 13:03)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]The schematic for the Emosafe looks identical to the one posted yesterday by K4680, in terms of the 'LAN transformer' arrangement at least.
Also note that Antoine mentions the EMO Systems EN70 HD back in post #11.
So very similar in principle, as to how the quality of components / performance compare, I have no idea.
Optic isolation is probably better. As written earlier in this thread the transformers used are similar to the ones used as standard on every ethernet input. Might be higher quality, but not as effective as optics I guess. Then we must fight noise in the electronics of the FMC... or start the crusade to have Devialet and others offer optical inputs in their devices. Would be possible if they use SFP slots. There are modules for copper too in addition to fiber.
(17-Aug-2017, 13:03)Confused Wrote: [ -> ] (17-Aug-2017, 12:04)ogs Wrote: [ -> ] (17-Aug-2017, 08:58)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]To clarify, what I meant to say was that prefer the idea of the Etalon in comparison to 'optical bridge' type devices, that is Ethernet to Toslink to Ethernet converters, which do need external power. Of course the Intona is a USB isolation type device, a different thing altogether. Brain fade on my part in my earlier post.
I wonder if this is good? Is is certainly practical in use.. link to specs here: http://www.emosystems.de/wp-content/uplo...EN-85e.pdf
The schematic for the Emosafe looks identical to the one posted yesterday by K4680, in terms of the 'LAN transformer' arrangement at least.
Also note that Antoine mentions the EMO Systems EN70 HD back in post #11.
So very similar in principle, as to how the quality of components / performance compare, I have no idea.
Hello Confused,
the LAN isolators are mast all in the construction and technical data largely identical. It is important that the transmission is shielded and the performance category
ISO 11801 PermanentLink (PL), Class C, or better Class D. If you are running a GB-network, you should use Class D!
There are still isolators, which have protective diodes built in against excessive voltages!
Hi chaps, how funny to have revived this thread a year or so later!
I realise there are many alternatives. I suppose what really grabbed me were the number of positive testimonials on a couple of French forums. Many had compared the Etalon to some of the others listed in this thread.
Anyway I have no idea if it was a good idea yet, hopefully I'll be able to report back in a week or so.
Guillaume
Just on a point of order, perhaps this thread should be moved to Tweaker's Corner?
A bit late in the game now, I know...