|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 3, 2021 15:21:18 GMT -5
Using my Mac mini & Roon as a server, I have the following digital output options:
Ethernet
USB
Optical TOSLINK
802.11
My AURALiC Aries Mini DAC, however has only the following digital input options:
Ethernet
Optical TOSLINK
802.11
Coaxial
The AURALiC does have a USB input, but it is ONLY for an external HDD and not for music.
Options I'm considering:
Optical TOSLINK (not preferred due to slow transfer & high jitter)
802.11 (not preferred due to router being at far end of house)
Ethernet
USB to coaxial adapter with coax input on the AURALiC
Which of the above will provide the lowest jitter and most robust music transfer?
Thanks - Boom
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Jun 3, 2021 15:51:53 GMT -5
The aries is a streamer, yes? Connect it to your home network in the most convenient manner. You'll be streaming via the network.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 3, 2021 16:44:33 GMT -5
Your choice is rather distinct. If you use the USB connection then the Mac Mini is acting as both your Roon server and Roon endpoint - which is then simply using an external USB DAC. If you use the Ethernet connection then the Auralic is acting as both the Roon endpoint (network client) and the DAC. In either case any significance in regards to jitter is going to depend on the Auralic. If you use the USB input, then it is acting as a USB DAC, which I assume will be operating in asynch mode, and so will be clocking the data connection. However, at least in theory, the Mac mini could cause clocking problems, or contribute noise via the USB ground connection. BUT, since a USB-connected DAC counts as part of the computer it's attached to, you are avoiding sending the audio data across the network to get to the DAC. This avoids potential network issues between them.
If you use the Ethernet input, then the Auralic is receiving the audio data as Ethernet packets, which are NOT a clocked signal. Jitter on Ethernet packets makes no difference whatsoever unless it actually is so bad it causes significant packet loss (which is unlikely). Once the packets are received, the data is extracted, and it is then "turned back into a digital audio signal"... Therefore the jitter level of that audio signal depends solely on the clock and circuitry used to perform this conversion (inside the Auralic)... This digital audio signal is then submitted to the DAC.
Since you plan to use the Auralic's DAC, which is in the same box, there is less opportunity for something to go wrong between there and the DAC... In principle you should see (or hear) no difference.... In practice it will depend to a degree on the internal architecture and processing power in the Auralic... If you use the Ethernet input you are asking the Auralic to do more "work".
(You are also asking the Mac mini to do a bit LESS work... )
If the Auralic has sufficient processing power to handle this then that seems like a good idea... (As a purpose-built audio device we might hope it will do a better job than the Mac mini...)
But, if the Auralic is short on horsepower, its overall performance might suffer because you're asking it to handle more of the load... (The question there is whether the Auralic contains both a good quality DAC and a good quality network client...)
(And, if your network is especially slow, or heavily loaded, you risk occasional dropouts due to network slowdowns.)
Note that the Ethernet connection WILL allow you to separate the Auralic from the computer... And make the two more or less physically independent of each other... For that reason alone I would prefer the Ethernet option - AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS. Using my Mac mini & Roon as a server, I have the following digital output options: Ethernet USB Optical TOSLINK 802.11 My AURALiC Aries Mini DAC, however has only the following digital input options: Ethernet Optical TOSLINK 802.11 Coaxial The AURALiC does have a USB input, but it is ONLY for an external HDD and not for music. Options I'm considering: Optical TOSLINK (not preferred due to slow transfer & high jitter) 802.11 (not preferred due to router being at far end of house) Ethernet USB to coaxial adapter with coax input on the AURALiC Which of the above will provide the lowest jitter and most robust music transfer? Thanks - Boom |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 3, 2021 16:49:57 GMT -5
Since the Roon server is the "manager" everything must go through it... So, regardless of what it can do, in this situation the Ares would be acting merely as a "dumb client" - playing only whatever the Roon server streams to it.
The only question is of whether the Auralic acts ONLY as a DAC - with the Roon server also fulfilling the role of Roon endpoint... Or whether the Auralic acts as both a network client for the Roon server AND the DAC...
The aries is a streamer, yes? Connect it to your home network in the most convenient manner. You'll be streaming via the network. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 3, 2021 17:00:03 GMT -5
I've connected the Mac's Ethernet port directly to the AURALiC's. Seems to work fine. Neither has to use Ethernet for internet access since both are connected to the house WiFi. Both the Mac and the AURALiC have sufficient horsepower for anything audio, but since the latter is purpose-built for music, I'll let it do the "heavy lifting." Thanks for the feedback!
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 4, 2021 10:33:45 GMT -5
I've connected the Mac's Ethernet port directly to the AURALiC's. Seems to work fine. Neither has to use Ethernet for internet access since both are connected to the house WiFi. Both the Mac and the AURALiC have sufficient horsepower for anything audio, but since the latter is purpose-built for music, I'll let it do the "heavy lifting." Thanks for the feedback! I’m curious if you’re using the dedicated ‘network’ between the Mac and Aries, and WiFi for general connectivity because … A) You don’t have wired Ethernet connections to those locations? B) You feel the purposed connection will give better performance? C) Something else? |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 4, 2021 13:34:45 GMT -5
The audio rack has both Ethernet and wireless available. But the router for both is at the opposite end of the house. To minimize wiring clutter at the audio rack Ethernet switch, I let the Mac Mini connect via WiFi. To ensure the most noise-free connection, I connect the Mac Mini and the AURALiC streamer/DAC by a one-foot Ethernet cable (not connected to the switch or to the router).
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Jun 4, 2021 15:12:42 GMT -5
It always seems, boomzilla, that you already know what you want to do, but you post questions here, then pretty much disregard the answers and go ahead with what you had already planned. Why not just post what you plan?
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 4, 2021 15:34:53 GMT -5
It always seems, boomzilla, that you already know what you want to do, but you post questions here, then pretty much disregard the answers and go ahead with what you had already planned. Why not just post what you plan? At the time, it wasn't planned. In fact, I hadn't even considered an Ethernet to Ethernet connection until I composed my post, realizing, at that time, that it might be feasible. But after reading Mr. Levkof's response, it seemed that not having a "live" bitstream between the two devices might make for a more reliable connection. The packet-by-packet transfer with reassembly, bit-checking, and reclocking in the streamer/DAC sounded like a more robust transfer method to me. Is there an audible difference? Not that I can tell, so it may all be academic. I listened to the optical TOSLINK connection for one night & found no flaw there either. But to tell the truth, I'm probably not stressing any of the connections with my 44.1 streaming. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 4, 2021 15:37:09 GMT -5
The one thing I would do differently would be to use wired connections to the switch for everything.
WiFi is never quite as solid a connection, or as low in latency, as an actual wire. Therefore I tend to avoid streaming or sending music through WiFi whenever practical.
And any decent Ethernet switch will deliver a very fast stable connection between two devices connected to any of its ports.
But, as long as it's working, and there aren't any dropouts, then you're good. (Incidentally, Ethernet connections are not especially "noise free", it's just that Ethernet is pretty much immune to noise.)
The audio rack has both Ethernet and wireless available. But the router for both is at the opposite end of the house. To minimize wiring clutter at the audio rack Ethernet switch, I let the Mac Mini connect via WiFi. To ensure the most noise-free connection, I connect the Mac Mini and the AURALiC streamer/DAC by a one-foot Ethernet cable (not connected to the switch or to the router). |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 4, 2021 15:59:17 GMT -5
The one thing I would do differently would be to use wired connections to the switch for everything. The important connection (Mac mini to Streamer/DAC) IS hard wired with a short Ethernet cable. I don't run it through the switch because it's a cheap Chinese switch & I don't trust it. I rarely stream from Qobuz, and when I do, I'm satisfied with WiFi. Maybe a better switch? But I don't see as how it could possibly improve on the important connection (that's already direct). I wish my streamer had a USB input, but it doesn't. One of the USB ports on the streamer is for external storage devices only & won't accept audio input. The other USB on the streamer is a digital output that bypasses the streamer's internal DAC. |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Jun 4, 2021 17:20:55 GMT -5
Boom, have to agree with Keith and Roon here. The mac mini should be connected to your router via ethernet if at all possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by tchaik on Jun 4, 2021 18:18:16 GMT -5
Boom, have to agree with Keith and Roon here. The mac mini should be connected to your router via ethernet if at all possible. I prefer to hook up my vacuum to my router. a lot less dust and wood chips. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 4, 2021 19:23:49 GMT -5
The one thing I would do differently would be to use wired connections to the switch for everything. Agreed, as was the gist of my question, besides the advantage of a wired connection, you can then remove one more wifi device from contention in the house, leaving that for devices that have no choice (phones, tablets, etc). |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 5, 2021 15:34:16 GMT -5
Everything Ethernet through the switch it is. Next question: If A & B are hooked to the same switch, and the switch is hooked to a router further down the line, does a signal from A, intended for B go through the switch only, or must the signal go through the router also?
Thanks - Boom
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Jun 5, 2021 17:21:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 5, 2021 18:16:04 GMT -5
Although this article DOES explain differences between switches and routers, it doesn't discuss routing of signals on the same switch. If A & B are connected to the same LAN via a switch, do signals between A&B flow through the switch only, or are all devices on the switch sent back through the router (despite not needing connection via the WAN)? The referenced article doesn't specifically say. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Jun 5, 2021 18:30:43 GMT -5
First, it doesn't really matter as long as the signal gets where it is needed. Second, the article says that a switch creates a LAN. Two computers communicating on the same LAN will use the switch to route the signal. If a computer needs information outside the LAN then it requires router functions to connect to another LAN (or WAN.)
Maybe a better IT geek than I will confirm.
|
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,160
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2021 19:16:06 GMT -5
A concise explanation from Cisco at www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/small-business/resource-center/networking/network-switch-vs-router.html" What is a switch?
Switches facilitate the sharing of resources by connecting together all the devices, including computers, printers, and servers, in a small business network. Thanks to the switch, these connected devices can share information and talk to each other, regardless of where they are in a building or on a campus. Building a small business network is not possible without switches to tie devices together.
What is a router?
Just as a switch connects multiple devices to create a network, a router connects multiple switches, and their respective networks, to form an even larger network. These networks may be in a single location or across multiple locations. When building a small business network, you will need one or more routers. In addition to connecting multiple networks together, the router also allows networked devices and multiple users to access the Internet.
Ultimately, a router works as a dispatcher, directing traffic and choosing the most efficient route for information, in the form of data packets, to travel across a network. A router connects your business to the world, protects information from security threats, and even decides which devices have priority over others." While this explanation defines which device principally does what, it does not explain whether or not the router will "take over" data traveling between two devices connected to a switch which is also connected to a router. Does the router take control of the switch in all data traveling between devices regardless of what would be the shortest route? Or is the routing between two devices left up to the two devices? I believe, in the end, that what DYohn points out is true that so long as the data gets to where it needs to be it shouldn't matter what the route is, how the routing actually operates is something that I'd like to know. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 5, 2021 21:45:29 GMT -5
Although this article DOES explain differences between switches and routers, it doesn't discuss routing of signals on the same switch. If A & B are connected to the same LAN via a switch, do signals between A&B flow through the switch only, or are all devices on the switch sent back through the router (despite not needing connection via the WAN)? The referenced article doesn't specifically say. It will go in one port of the switch and directly back out another to the destination, with a switch multiple such conversations can go on simultaneously, with a good switch each conversation can be at the maximum rate of the port. The packets will only go to the router if they’re destined for a different network, in a home network that usually means the Internet, or between wired and WiFi. |
|
