22-Dec-2019, 13:09
In a way this picks up from my post #327 in this thread. Yesterday I had some free time to try some listening tests with the EtherRegen. Referring back to #327, prior to receiving the EtherRegen, my preferred set up was running a standard TP-Link switch, which then feeds my SOtM modified D-Link switch. I only had about an hour spare yesterday, at first I tried comparing the streaming system, PC, EtherRegen, SOtM kit, Mutec kit against feeding the MC3+USB from my USB stick playing Arcam. This allows almost a direct A/B switch, but not ideal as a small volume adjustment is required to equalise, and it does require getting up to change the input on the MC3+USB. This was a little inconclusive. I had a feeling that the streaming set-up was best, but it was marginal. I decided that this was not the best way to test the EtherRegen, so I thought I would try the quick Ethernet cable swap method, to take the EtherRegen in and out of the chain. This method works surprisingly well, no need to worry about volume levelling, and the streaming set-up remained stable even swapping cables between the EtherRegen and the SOtM modified switch. Again, this test was a little inconclusive. I did have a slight feeling that things sounded better with the EtherRegen in place, but at the same time, it was not a big enough difference for me to be sure that I was not kidding myself. At this point I ran out of time yesterday, and other seasonal related tasks go in the way of further experimenting.
Reflecting on the above, it occurred to me that in a way the above test was not entirely fair. Consider that without the EtherRegen, I was running a standard switch, then a SOtM switch, which is effectively running off the Mutec Ref 10. So even without the EtherRegen I have a degree of noise isolation from the upstream kit, plus I am running switch with a decent clock signal.
This takes me to this morning. I thought I would try the following:
A) TP-Link switch, SOtM modified switch versus TP-Link switch, SOtM modified, EtherRegen
B) TP-Link switch versus TP-Link switch, EtherRegen
I chose the above over the more obvious comparison of simply substituting the TP-Link switch for the EtherRegen, because A and B above can be done with a single Ethernet cable swap, and furthermore, the EtherRegen is supposed to make everything before the switch irrelevant, so why should it care if the TP-Link switch is there or not.
Anyway, the conclusion is not far off the one I reached yesterday. Yes, I do feel that there is a very slight improvement from having either the SOtM modified switch or the EtherRegen in the chain, but the difference is very subtle indeed. Could it be imagined? I really am not sure, it is in that strange zone where you go from thinking yes, I can here something, then after a few swaps either way, you become less sure if it is real or imagined. If I have to come off the fence and commit, I would go with an improvement, but very small. What do I think I am hearing as an improvement? It is a sharpening of the sound stage, a touch more focus and resolution to the details.
For now, I will be leaving the system as TP-Link switch, SOtM modified switch, EtherRegen. This seemed best to me. My overcomplicated system gets yet more complicated. One thing to try in the future will be to use the REF10 to provide the clock reference to the EtherRegen.
Whilst in the mood for confusing A/B swaps, I thought I would try the EtherRegen feeding the Devialet direct in CI board Roon RAAT mode, and compare to feeding the Devialet direct from the standard TP-Link switch. Curiously, or perhaps not curiously, the results were pretty much the same as when feeding my SOtM / Mutec kit. I could detect a small difference, but perhaps at the margins of what might be imagined. Same thing as before, the sound seemed a little more focused, tidier if you like, a fraction sharper with more resolution. I think ….
So no jaws literally hitting the floor. To provide a little context to all this, I actually preferred my system with the standard TP-Link switch to the old SOtM modified switch on its own, and the TP-Link switch is one that used in comparison to an AQVOX switch, which I ultimately sent back for a refund, I just could not find any difference between the two. So this is very marginal stuff, at the edge of what might be messing with your mind, but I would take the EtherRegen over the AQVOX, and sit down and enjoy the music happy that it might just be adding that touch of polish to the sound.
The next step for me is to see how I find the system in normal use over time. Sometimes these first impressions hold, sometimes other things become apparent in normal use with a range of music. Time will tell.
Reflecting on the above, it occurred to me that in a way the above test was not entirely fair. Consider that without the EtherRegen, I was running a standard switch, then a SOtM switch, which is effectively running off the Mutec Ref 10. So even without the EtherRegen I have a degree of noise isolation from the upstream kit, plus I am running switch with a decent clock signal.
This takes me to this morning. I thought I would try the following:
A) TP-Link switch, SOtM modified switch versus TP-Link switch, SOtM modified, EtherRegen
B) TP-Link switch versus TP-Link switch, EtherRegen
I chose the above over the more obvious comparison of simply substituting the TP-Link switch for the EtherRegen, because A and B above can be done with a single Ethernet cable swap, and furthermore, the EtherRegen is supposed to make everything before the switch irrelevant, so why should it care if the TP-Link switch is there or not.
Anyway, the conclusion is not far off the one I reached yesterday. Yes, I do feel that there is a very slight improvement from having either the SOtM modified switch or the EtherRegen in the chain, but the difference is very subtle indeed. Could it be imagined? I really am not sure, it is in that strange zone where you go from thinking yes, I can here something, then after a few swaps either way, you become less sure if it is real or imagined. If I have to come off the fence and commit, I would go with an improvement, but very small. What do I think I am hearing as an improvement? It is a sharpening of the sound stage, a touch more focus and resolution to the details.
For now, I will be leaving the system as TP-Link switch, SOtM modified switch, EtherRegen. This seemed best to me. My overcomplicated system gets yet more complicated. One thing to try in the future will be to use the REF10 to provide the clock reference to the EtherRegen.
Whilst in the mood for confusing A/B swaps, I thought I would try the EtherRegen feeding the Devialet direct in CI board Roon RAAT mode, and compare to feeding the Devialet direct from the standard TP-Link switch. Curiously, or perhaps not curiously, the results were pretty much the same as when feeding my SOtM / Mutec kit. I could detect a small difference, but perhaps at the margins of what might be imagined. Same thing as before, the sound seemed a little more focused, tidier if you like, a fraction sharper with more resolution. I think ….
So no jaws literally hitting the floor. To provide a little context to all this, I actually preferred my system with the standard TP-Link switch to the old SOtM modified switch on its own, and the TP-Link switch is one that used in comparison to an AQVOX switch, which I ultimately sent back for a refund, I just could not find any difference between the two. So this is very marginal stuff, at the edge of what might be messing with your mind, but I would take the EtherRegen over the AQVOX, and sit down and enjoy the music happy that it might just be adding that touch of polish to the sound.
The next step for me is to see how I find the system in normal use over time. Sometimes these first impressions hold, sometimes other things become apparent in normal use with a range of music. Time will tell.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
