cisco 2960 8tc/ vs paul pang tcxo

The Cisco 2960 Catalyst switches are not made anymore, i use two 2960  port switches , one with inbuilt quality shielded PSU (SMPS) and the other externally 48 volt powered and a 3560 8 port Layer 3 Catalyst switch with inbuilt SMPS. My switches..

WS-C3560 8PC-S is revision  A0 

WS- C2960PD 8TT-L is revision C0 (external 48 v DC powered)

WS-C2960 8TC-L is revision C0 ( internal  SMPS)

I connect my 3560 to my NDX currently via a shielded low cost Cat 6A cable.. I find with these switches the sound is clearer and cleaner and less smudgey or blurred (compared to Netgear switches I own) ..  on my setup at least

You might find that very short Ethernet patch leads are not optimum for connection to audio equipment.. also by default the Cisco professional switches will delay enabling a port when a device is powered up or connected as they are doing loop detection analysis that could otherwise bring down your network which is why your NAS might take a little time before appearing... consumer switches don't normally have such safeguards . If you know how to program the Cisco switch you can configure the removal of loop detection on a particular port for almost instant activation of a port.... its very straightforward once you are in Configure Terminal mode.

Pierre, these switches are almost bomb proof, they may well outlive you....

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

The Cisco 2960 Catalyst switches are not made anymore, i use two 2960  port switches , one with inbuilt quality shielded PSU (SMPS) and the other externally 48 volt powered and a 3560 8 port Layer 3 Catalyst switch with inbuilt SMPS. My switches..

WS-C3560 8PC-S is revision  A0 

WS- C2960PD 8TT-L is revision C0 (external 48 v DC powered)

WS-C2960 8TC-L is revision C0 ( internal  SMPS)

I connect my 3560 to my NDX currently via a shielded low cost Cat 6A cable.. I find with these switches the sound is clearer and cleaner and less smudgey or blurred (compared to Netgear switches I own) ..  on my setup at least

You might find that very short Ethernet patch leads are not optimum for connection to audio equipment.. also by default the Cisco professional switches will delay enabling a port when a device is powered up or connected as they are doing loop detection analysis that could otherwise bring down your network which is why your NAS might take a little time before appearing... consumer switches don't normally have such safeguards . If you know how to program the Cisco switch you can configure the removal of loop detection on a particular port for almost instant activation of a port.... its very straightforward once you are in Configure Terminal mode.

Pierre, these switches are almost bomb proof, they may well outlive you....

ok simon, thanks, if they may outlive me i am reassured. my is 2960-8tc, but i find 2960- 8Pc( so pc not tc) from 2015 year on amazon us. I was searching which models were the more recent.  What is the most recent 8 ports cisco in the league of the 2960 ?   it is difficult to find this information.  Thanks.    I am just curious about.

I am a big fan of the paul pang stuff but have to say his d-link switches are not anywhere near as good as the original zyxels. If you can get a comparison with one it would be well worth it. As I have said previously these produce the best streaming playback I have heard.

Hi Pierre, the 2960-X switches are the latest available new

S

I could be wrong, but I think the 2960-X don't have 8 port variants any more, it's the 2960-CX that's got 8 ports.

RICHYH posted:

I am a big fan of the paul pang stuff but have to say his d-link switches are not anywhere near as good as the original zyxels. If you can get a comparison with one it would be well worth it. As I have said previously these produce the best streaming playback I have heard.

have you compared to cisco 2960 catalyst?   i put a good quality power cord on it and found the sound with more bass and body vs the paul pang dlink with a big linear ps.

Perhaps the zyxel is better, i don't know, but the cisco is a 700GBP switch as new, with complex stuff inside.  But alone, this cisco is a little edgy. With lan isolator before and a good power cord, it has very good drive and dynamics.  The paul pang with big linear ps, is quite as good but a little lean.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Hi Pierre, the 2960-X switches are the latest available new

S

yes but what are the today cisco 8 port produced, their name?  perhaps their name are not 2960 or 3560?

Keler Pierre posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Hi Pierre, the 2960-X switches are the latest available new

S

yes but what are the today cisco 8 port produced, their name?  perhaps their name are not 2960 or 3560?

As  a major vendor, Cico have several product lines. Look at the 296o-CX for their 8 port Catalyst switches, they also have a Meraki range where I think it's the MS220 that has an 8 port variant, be careful though, Meraki assumes some cloud management. There might be an 8 port Catalyst 2960-X variant, but I can't immediately spot it on CCO.

Eoink posted:

Keler Pierre posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Hi Pierre, the 2960-X switches are the latest available new

S

yes but what are the today cisco 8 port produced, their name?  perhaps their name are not 2960 or 3560?

As  a major vendor, Cico have several product lines. Look at the 296o-CX for their 8 port Catalyst switches, they also have a Meraki range where I think it's the MS220 that has an 8 port variant, be careful though, Meraki assumes some cloud management. There might be an 8 port Catalyst 2960-X variant, but I can't immediately spot it on CCO.

i am curious of the 2017 cisco products, but it seems difficult to have these informations on the cisco website or another.

cisco 2960cx-8pc and 8tc

cisco3560cx-8xpd and 8pt.    are the exact names of current models.   It is what you said. But are there differences, 3560 are more expensive, but why?

Hi the 2960X switches offer upgraded hardware over the original 2960 switches providing more switching capacity, energy efficient operation, net flow reporting capability and layer 3 capability subject to firmware as well as many other things.

The 3560 also offers energy efficient operation and supports layer 3 functionality..

A layer  3 switch is the term used to describe a router and switch combined (i.e. It can operate at layer 3 of the TCP/IP stack, as opposed to regular switches which operate mostly at layer 2)... though the routing functionality and routing performance on smaller layer 3 switches is usually less than full blown dedicated routers.. also these layer 3 switches aren't the type of devices that can really double up as your broadband ISP router.

Cisco 2960X FAQ.    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/p...s/qa_c67-728348.html

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Hi the 2960X switches offer upgraded hardware over the original 2960 switches providing more switching capacity, energy efficient operation, net flow reporting capability and layer 3 capability subject to firmware as well as many other things.

The 3560 also offers energy efficient operation and supports layer 3 functionality..

A layer  3 switch is the term used to describe a router and switch combined (i.e. It can operate at layer 3 of the TCP/IP stack, as opposed to regular switches which operate mostly at layer 2)... though the routing functionality and routing performance on smaller layer 3 switches is usually less than full blown dedicated routers.. also these layer 3 switches aren't the type of devices that can really double up as your broadband ISP router.

Cisco 2960X FAQ.    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/p...s/qa_c67-728348.html

ok thanks, all is clear now. thanks

Bought a Cisco 2960-8TC from the bay.

M

I'd be interested to hear how it compares to your current switch 

Has anyone compared the sound from a 2960 vs something like the little 110D with an ifi ipower? 

Hi Finkfan,

I will post a comparison.

Currently my main switch is a CISCO ---> Netgear, for my HiFI. I will replace the Netgear for the comparison.

M

Finkfan posted:

Has anyone compared the sound from a 2960 vs something like the little 110D with an ifi ipower? 

But surely these are quite different devices, what is the capability of the 110D? It's not the sound of the switch itself, it's the noise and clock accuracy of the switch itself feeding the network interface card of the streamer... also not quite sure what changing the power supplies hopes to achieve.... unless you are such a poor non compliant EMC device that is radiating from connected leads and polluting your mains...

My Netgear was powered by an IFI 9v. Now by an LPSU.

M

Finkfan posted:

Has anyone compared the sound from a 2960 vs something like the little 110D with an ifi ipower? 

i had netgear gs105 with ifi power then with my uptone js2:  the cisco was more dynamic, more drive and bass. The netgear/ linear ps nicier, more natural.  After i put acoustic revive lan isolator before the cisco and add a good quality power cord to the cisco:   the edginess was gone.

For cisco alone vs your 110d with ifi power, cisco is better.

I wouldn't recommend the use of acoustic revive as my version appeared to push the Ethernet link to operate outside specification, and also interfere with some low energy line driver techniques on some switch devices which will work against reducing Ethernet line current and therefore noise.

if you want to use some sort of increased galvanic isolator for safety reasons etc ensure it's active.

i found on the Cisco 2960 devices no difference between 48 volt DC decoupled powersupply as used by PoE and integrated high quality (low emission) PSU [the 2960 EMC support appears quite extensive as I would expect for quality robust commercial equipment ]. I have not experimented with modular multiple redundant power supplies.

Further if using an external PSU for what ever reason for an Ethernet PD (powered device), I would ensure you use a PSU specifically designed for that PD i.e. Switch and designed to ensure the EMI compliance is met for that PD otherwise you may well be creating EMI issues elsewhere. For these devices it's not really about having a PSU with a linear transformer, that's almost irrelevant. You should ensure that the PSU you use when connected to your switch/router etc has been confirmed to meet Class B EMI spefications. Most quality switch vendors will specify compliant PSUs that have been tested to meet this if decoupled from the device itself. Also on 48 volt PoE devices you would expect an incorporated quality filtered DC to DC buck converter to be used that meets the EMI specifications.

Simon,

I view this whole area with some suspicion.I have been trying to address edge in my system for the best part of a year. I have more or less solved this by addressing my earthing. I believe this was an issue introduced via floating earth in DC powered devices. As a part of testing the 2960 I am going to review all the bits and pieces I have introduced in the last seven months. But, I will start by simply slotting in the new (to me) switch.

M

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

I wouldn't recommend the use of acoustic revive as my version appeared to push the Ethernet link to operate outside specification, and also interfere with some low energy line driver techniques on some switch devices which will work against reducing Ethernet line current and therefore noise.

if you want to use some sort of increased galvanic isolator for safety reasons etc ensure it's active.

i found on the Cisco 2960 devices no difference between 48 volt DC decoupled powersupply as used by PoE and integrated high quality (low emission) PSU [the 2960 EMC support appears quite extensive as I would expect for quality robust commercial equipment ]. I have not experimented with modular multiple redundant power supplies.

for me it works very good, between router and switch.  More fluency, softness of tones, and same dynamics.   But when i put the acoustic revive before the serve, the sound quality decreased...

Mr Underhill posted:

Simon,

I view this whole area with some suspicion.I have been trying to address edge in my system for the best part of a year. I have more or less solved this by addressing my earthing. I believe this was an issue introduced via floating earth in DC powered devices. As a part of testing the 2960 I am going to review all the bits and pieces I have introduced in the last seven months. But, I will start by simply slotting in the new (to me) switch.

M

i bought for around 50GBP good used power cord on bay for the cisco. It put off some edginess from the cisco.   But perhaps you will not hear this edginess....

Mr Underhill posted:

Simon,

I view this whole area with some suspicion.I have been trying to address edge in my system for the best part of a year. I have more or less solved this by addressing my earthing. I believe this was an issue introduced via floating earth in DC powered devices. As a part of testing the 2960 I am going to review all the bits and pieces I have introduced in the last seven months. But, I will start by simply slotting in the new (to me) switch.

M

Mr U if you are happy with your sound and performance I certainly wouldn't dabble here. However some cheaper consumer network equipment are not that great for radiated emissions... they are legally compliant (I'm sure), but EN55022 Class B allows quite a tolerance. Certainly if you read some of the TI engineering papers on reducing Ethernet (and USB) radiated emmisions you can see why there is a huge variance and reduced performance on cheaper devices... and why having a trailing DC lead from a powersupply to a consumer switch is inviting challenges.

But good luck with your trials, and yes most of the commercial mains powered Cisco devices that I am aware of are safety earth grounded... not floating... which would not be desirable at all.