Cisco switch

I think there is a possibility of interference being conducted through less well engineered switches.

With the Netgear switch there was a slight degradation effect if my PC was plugged into the same switch as the NAS and streamer; with the 2960, I think this effect has disappeared.  I think this may be due to better engineered ground planes in the switch and a better power supply providing lower impedance paths for the stray currents.

Running my “new” 2960 as a “dedicated” switch only because I would run out of ports otherwise, and want full gig capability for the rest of the house. And for $29 all in, why not? Sounds maybe 10-20% better than the fanless 24 port Trendnet that is the main switch. 

Anyway, my question is, which port should I plug in the onward connection to the main switch? Currently have it in one of the 8 10/100 ports, but should it be plugged into the 10/100/1000 uplink port? 

charlesphoto posted:

Anyway, my question is, which port should I plug in the onward connection to the main switch? Currently have it in one of the 8 10/100 ports, but should it be plugged into the 10/100/1000 uplink port? 

I use the “uplink” port to link back to the rest of my network. That’s mainly because I’m using it with an SFP,  but with regular Ethernet cables, any port works fine. 

on the beginning, when i bought the nds, and the unitserve, all was connected to my commercial router ( with phone and tv).   Then, after reading some posts, i bought a little 5 port switch, netgear gs105, where i connected only my nds and serve:  the upgrade in sound was immediate. For me, this separation from the router / tv/ phone was very beneficial.

After i just replaced the netgear by the cisco 2960.   Perhaps, finally, the benefit was not the separation from the commercial router but just the fact that the router was a crap?

French Rooster posted:

 but just the fact that the router was a crap?

ISP provided hubs and routers, exceedingly crap, NetGear switches pretty crap  

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

Edit. Your above post, option 1 is the best approach assuming it matches your layout and minimimizes the runs of Ethernet patch leads.

Hi Simon,

Thank you for your reply.

Option 1 was what I intended to do.

Having two switches interconnected seemed, obviously, a bit odd in the context of my home network.

I worked as a sys. admin. in the late nineties, begin of two thousands, and know the benefits of a switch versus a hub.  Of course, I’m no engineer with advanced network skills.

But, after reading some comments of people quoting you, or interpreting your explanations, I thought that, for some strange reason, layering switches would help. To be honest, I first thought of some audiophile mumbo-jumbo. But then read your bio which indicates clearly that you know what you’re talking about.  So I took the liberty to ask you directly.

I’ll buy a small fanless Cisco Catalyst 3560CX-12PC-S Switch and store it the same place as the one I have now (check my profile, I posted some pics of my small setup).

Everything should be ready when/if the new streamer comes 

 Tom

ChrisSU posted:

charlesphoto posted:

Anyway, my question is, which port should I plug in the onward connection to the main switch? Currently have it in one of the 8 10/100 ports, but should it be plugged into the 10/100/1000 uplink port? 

I use the “uplink” port to link back to the rest of my network. That’s mainly because I’m using it with an SFP,  but with regular Ethernet cables, any port works fine. 

Hmmm, your use of the SFP has me thinking. I still swear by the FMC’s I’m using pre-renderer giving me better sound quality, but I’m wondering if I used a second 2960 (since used cheap as chips), and if I went from the Trendnet switch to the 2960 with ethernet, and then SFP uplink to SFP uplink, and then ethernet out to the microRendu if I couldn’t then eliminate the FMC’s and their power supplies. I would have a dedicated power circuit to plug the near renderer 2960 in as well that it wouldn’t share with anything else. Thoughts?

TomSer posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

Edit. Your above post, option 1 is the best approach assuming it matches your layout and minimimizes the runs of Ethernet patch leads.

Hi Simon,

Thank you for your reply.

Option 1 was what I intended to do.

Having two switches interconnected seemed, obviously, a bit odd in the context of my home network.

I worked as a sys. admin. in the late nineties, begin of two thousands, and know the benefits of a switch versus a hub.  Of course, I’m no engineer with advanced network skills.

But, after reading some comments of people quoting you, or interpreting your explanations, I thought that, for some strange reason, layering switches would help. To be honest, I first thought of some audiophile mumbo-jumbo. But then read your bio which indicates clearly that you know what you’re talking about.  So I took the liberty to ask you directly.

I’ll buy a small fanless Cisco Catalyst 3560CX-12PC-S Switch and store it the same place as the one I have now (check my profile, I posted some pics of my small setup).

Everything should be ready when/if the new streamer comes 

 Tom

 

Wow, $500-1000 vs $30-50 for a used 2960 as a sub switch. I’d think long and hard about that one. I might also wait to see what kind of true audiophile switch Uptone will be coming out with later in the year (probably in the $400 range). 

charlesphoto posted:

ChrisSU posted:

charlesphoto posted:

Anyway, my question is, which port should I plug in the onward connection to the main switch? Currently have it in one of the 8 10/100 ports, but should it be plugged into the 10/100/1000 uplink port? 

I use the “uplink” port to link back to the rest of my network. That’s mainly because I’m using it with an SFP,  but with regular Ethernet cables, any port works fine. 

Hmmm, your use of the SFP has me thinking. I still swear by the FMC’s I’m using pre-renderer giving me better sound quality, but I’m wondering if I used a second 2960 (since used cheap as chips), and if I went from the Trendnet switch to the 2960 with ethernet, and then SFP uplink to SFP uplink, and then ethernet out to the microRendu if I couldn’t then eliminate the FMC’s and their power supplies. I would have a dedicated power circuit to plug the near renderer 2960 in as well that it wouldn’t share with anything else. Thoughts?

If you want to see it that way, a 2960 with SFP can act as an FMC. I have a newer white one, which has two SFP ports, connected to my router. This provides fibre optic links to two other 2960s elsewhere in the house, one for my NDX, and another for more or less everything else.

My original reason for using an optical LAN was that my house is in an exposed location, quite prone to lightning strikes, particularly via the phone line. Having had a Unitiserve, amongst other things, destroyed by lightning, I put in the optical cable for isolation. Whether or not it sounds any better/different, the jury is still out. It's pretty cheap and easy to do if you fancy giving it a try.

Another advantage of doing this, of course, is that you will no longer get your wrist slapped by S-in-S for using those pesky FMCs 

Thanks for the reply Chris. Sounds good, though I may not be able to get a fiber cable through the floor from the office closet where the switches and server reside to the living room. I may explore what it sounds like plugging the NUC into the Trendnet switch in the office closet, and then moving the 2960 to the living room hifi area and only having the mR connection, and see if powering it from the dedicated outlet eliminates the need for the FMC’s. 

charlesphoto posted:

Thanks for the reply Chris. Sounds good, though I may not be able to get a fiber cable through the floor from the office closet where the switches and server reside to the living room. I may explore what it sounds like plugging the NUC into the Trendnet switch in the office closet, and then moving the 2960 to the living room hifi area and only having the mR connection, and see if powering it from the dedicated outlet eliminates the need for the FMC’s. 

LC connectors on fibre are smaller than RJ45 plugs, so there are no excuses! (I originally did this with POF cabling, which is even thinner, and has no plug at all, but still requires FMCs.)

Ok, good to know!

Oh, and Chris, is there any specific SFP modules for the 2960 I should look for? Cheaper is better of course. 

charlesphoto posted:

Oh, and Chris, is there any specific SFP modules for the 2960 I should look for? Cheaper is better of course. 

Yes, the model you want for a 2960 with LC connector is a GLC-SX-MM. The genuine Cisco ones are pretty expensive, but like the switches, can sometimes be found quite cheaply on ebay. There are lots of non-Cisco versions which should work, and are cheap to buy new. It is often necessary to log into the switch in order to prevent it from blocking non-OEM ones, though. 

Perfect. And last one, I promise! What’s the difference between OM1 and OM3 cable? Which should I go for?

charlesphoto posted:

Perfect. And last one, I promise! What’s the difference between OM1 and OM3 cable? Which should I go for?

Mine are just bog standard OM1. I'm pretty sure using OM3 will be fine too, but a bit like using Cat7 when Cat5e is all you really need.

Perfect. Looks like I can get OEM transceivers off the bay for about $5 each, another switch for $30 and cable for about $10 and good to go. Should be able to tape the end of the fiber cable to one my existing ethernet cables and snake it through the hole. Thanks so much!  

Once you've got the right bits and pieces, it's all pretty simple - good luck!

So I was rummaging around in work today and lo and behold I found a spare Cisco 2960 C Series PoE 12 way switch! It's one of the white ones. A few dumb questions - do I need to take any precautions regarding the PoE or can just go ahead and connect up as normal? Secondly, there's a reset button on the back - does this return to it to factory settings?

No need to worry about the PoE, it will only come on if the endpoint requires PoE. Standard Ethernet cables are fine in either case. Yes to the reset, but have an online search for it's precise use. Come back if you get stuck and I'll have a look online. Russ

rjfk posted:

No need to worry about the PoE, it will only come on if the endpoint requires PoE. Standard Ethernet cables are fine in either case. Yes to the reset, but have an online search for it's precise use. Come back if you get stuck and I'll have a look online. Russ

 

 

Up and running Russ thank you. Hmmm, hard to put your finger on it but it certainly adds a little something! 

I wonder using wifi connection regardless of the streamer, say Raspberry Pi or something else is better than ethernet connection. Say only for Tidal streaming and no heavy wifi traffic.

For those using the Cisco switch (or another), try swapping the supplied lead with a Naim standard power cable, or even better as i have been waiting (Nova upgrade / downgrade drama) to try a Powerline - i found it improved matters to be more Naim.

I did try a high end Supra cable, did post on the forum, it messed the sound up for me, i would love to use my Chord Aray but that is very happy on my Nova and going nowhere.

after several months with the cisco 2960, i finally returned to my netgear gs105 powered by a high quality linear ps( hdplex).  I had too much bass and body with my system and room.

The sound with the netgear / hdplex combo is better balanced for my ears, a bit softer and nicer, with same involvement and dynamics.   

The cisco is technically better but also noisier vs my combo.  I hear a bit more details, longer notes, and nicer tone colors.   The cisco is more forward and gives a bit more bass and body, but for me it is too much.   All is finally system dependent.    With a bigger room than i have, i would keep the cisco i guess.  

So I bypassed the little TP-Link FMC’s I’ve been using by going from a 2960 via SFP and optical fiber to another 2960 at the hifi and then out to the microRendu with my Ghent ethernet cable. Much better imo. More bass and body and smoother, more musical and less “hifi” sounding. Might be too much for some, as French Rooster describes above, but def, less aneamic sounding then through the FMC’s (though also less detail, but that might be perception). Also was able to lose an LPS, and just overall simplify the setup. So if anyone is considering this option, it works, and is inexpensive. The second $29 2960 I bought looked practically brand new, as well as the $5 ea OEM SFPs. One of the best bargains in streaming hifi.