Cisco switch

Gazza posted:

It’s almost a bit annoying.......but the 2960 really makes a difference, many thanks to those on the forum who padded on their wisdom.

Yes it does, and not in the hi-fi sense. music just flows better and is more enjoyable...I think it was Huge who first recommended it. Many great people on here I have learned alot.

I have found most Catalyst switches seem to make a difference. When I first posted my findings of the 2960 on the forum a couple years back it was the 2960 I described. However the 3560, a catalyst layer 3 switch with PoE options has a similar positive effect and is what I currently use to connec to my streamer. Again these are available used at almost throw away prices on the usual auction sites.

Simon

◾ Have you the same SQ from the 3560 or maybe better than the 2960?

◾ Is it,like the 2960 "plug and play" or must you do some more advanced installations.

◾ Can you give us the exact modelnumber for the 3560 you have.

We are alot of people here in Sweden, who use this 2960 because of your recommendation......THANK YOU! I know this because I have a High End-forum here....and we have followed your advice here on this fantastic Naim-forum.....again, THANK YOU.

/Peder

Simon-in-Suffolk...hey  ,don't forget my 3 questions right up here if you have time.

We shall order up to 15 Cisco 2960 for the third time,we do this at our forum for members. We have found a company that only works with preloved Cisco equipment,they also test every Cisco in a 26-steps testprogram. So we know that every Cisco is up to date.

Some has failed in this testprogram,before we buy'd from this company, we take Cisco's from "the bay". Two times with Cisco's from "the bay",there have been lower soundquality from one Cisco. So it is more save to buy from this company we think,....if we talk about soundquality.

Before we order again,it would be good to know if we shall go for the 2960,or maybe the 3560 that you talk about.

Over to you,..../Peder

 

Just got a WS-C2960-48TC-L today. It won't play with my Arcam rPlay though. Youview box/Netflix works fine.

Logged onto the switch bit it doesn't understand "flash_init" or "boot"

See below output.

Switch#flash_init

Translating "flash_init"...domain server (255.255.255.255)

% Unknown command or computer name, or unable to find computer address

Switch#dir flash:

Directory of flash:/

 

    2  -rwx    11664004   Mar 1 1993 00:04:31 +00:00  c2960-lanbasek9-mz.122-58.SE1.bin

    3  -rwx         426   Mar 1 1993 00:01:30 +00:00  express_setup.debug

    4  -rwx        1048   Mar 1 1993 00:01:02 +00:00  multiple-fs

    5  -rwx       39049   Jan 6 2016 11:13:48 +00:00  config.text.renamed

    6  -rwx        2116   Apr 1 2016 08:57:48 +00:00  vlan.dat.renamed

    7  -rwx        3851   Jan 6 2016 11:13:48 +00:00  private-config.text.renamed

Any ideas? Do I need to get on via console instead of telnet?

😀

Great Richard,nice to hear about your higher SQ .I asked Simon about the modelnr for the 3560, because the WS-C2960-8TC-L  is different against WS-C2960-8TC-S. The WS-C2960-8TC-L (the right switch) is stronger.

I have read that on this forum,because of that,when we shall order up to 15 Cisco's on our forum......we will order the right Cisco's. And Simon talk about his 3560,we will of course have the right modelnr before we order this 15 Cisco's for our members.

I have asked 3 question a bit up here in this thread,I hope I can have some answer before we order this 15 Cisco's.

/Peder

Hi Peder,

I did a lot of testing on this a year or two ago. I used three models of switch, all Cisco Catalyst’s. The WS-C2960L-8PS-LL, the WS-C3560-8PC-S (v01) and what I'm currently using a WS-C3560CX-12PC-S.

I tested with power-over-ethernet on and off on the switch, with various different software versions and with various configs loaded on the switch. The software versions were all within the 15 major release train including IP Base and IP Services variants. I did not regression test with very old images and this could be where the difference you are hearing is coming from.

I could hear no difference between switches and configurations but could hear a similar difference between and three models and the previous NetGear switch.

S-in-S posted around the time that he had a theory it was due to the circuitry in the Catalyst switches and how they ensured accurate timing of packet delivery. My testing would appear to confirm that. I wouldn't worry too much about the specific varient of Catalsyt switch, except for keeping to the compact versions which don't have a fan.

So any Catalyst switch, unless you know better keep it simple and don’t bother with any config, but if you do config it that does not appear to impact audio quality. For simplicity’s sake I would avoid multiple VLANs in a domestic environment if you are tempted but that route. Needless complexity.

I didn’t test VLANs in my testing for the above reason and if you do need PoE I’d configure it as far away as possible from the streaming ports. So in my scenario I have NAS and audio kit on the lower numbered ports and the wireless access point which draws PoE on the highest numbered port. The Ethernet cables are routed separately just to ensure no noise contamination between cables.

 Hope this helps,

Russ

Peder posted:

Simon

◾ Have you the same SQ from the 3560 or maybe better than the 2960?

◾ Is it,like the 2960 "plug and play" or must you do some more advanced installations.

◾ Can you give us the exact modelnumber for the 3560 you have

 

1. Can’t tell any difference between the 2960 and 3560. They are both Catalyst switches if that is relevant.

2. Yes from factory default, the switch will function like an un managed switch and be a plug and play standard layer 2 switch.

3. Cisco WS-C3560-8PC (PowerPC405) processor (revision A0) with 131072K bytes of memory.

Cheers

Simon

Bunny Colvin posted:

I don't suppose anyone knows if some of the other Cisco models are equally beneficial? The Cisco SF 110D 8 Port, seems to be readily available where I live but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

First thing is if you do go for the baby Cisco,  be sure its the SG110D,    the SF is 'fast' 10/100 Mb/s   the SG is 'Gigibit'  10/100/1000 Mb/s.          I have the SG110D to replace a Netgear GS105;  I'm not getting into sound better claims, but it does something different in my system compared to the Netgear & I'm not talking only about SQ, 

Bunny Colvin posted:

I don't suppose anyone knows if some of the other Cisco models are equally beneficial? The Cisco SF 110D 8 Port, seems to be readily available where I live but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

I bought mine from UsedCisco in Germany for 50€ plus  carriage in Europe at 10€. Very pleased as it was refurbished and tested. No bidding needed. I suspect that Peder and his Scandinavian group buy from them. Nothing in your profile to indicate what part of world you come from.

Phil

Bunny Colvin posted:

I don't suppose anyone knows if some of the other Cisco models are equally beneficial? The Cisco SF 110D 8 Port, seems to be readily available where I live but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

The Cisco 'Small Business' range (100, 200 and 300 series) are very different to the Catalyst switches. My only experience of them is a 300 series switch, which was very electrically noisy, so possibly not the best for connecting up audio equipment, although of course, they will get the bits to the right destination, I'm sure. The safe bet would seem to be to hold out for a Catalyst switch

Bunny Colvin posted:

I don't suppose anyone knows if some of the other Cisco models are equally beneficial? The Cisco SF 110D 8 Port, seems to be readily available where I live but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

Yes I have found the Catalyst 3560 also equally beneficial... again the 8 port version. A little dicky bird tells me the word is getting around the would of digital Hi-Fi audio and possibly that is leading to the  buying up the available used 8 port stock... it is the Catalyst devices that seem to be beneficial, perhaps because of the their physical layer (PHY) design and clock regulation. Just because the switch says Cisco on the front doesn’t mean it will neccessarily sound beneficial... I suspect it’s the internal architecture and design that counts.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:
Bunny Colvin posted:

I don't suppose anyone knows if some of the other Cisco models are equally beneficial? The Cisco SF 110D 8 Port, seems to be readily available where I live but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

Yes I have found the Catalyst 3560 also equally beneficial... again the 8 port version. A little dicky bird tells me the word is getting around the would of digital Hi-Fi audio and possibly that is leading to the  buying up the available used 8 port stock... it is the Catalyst devices that seem to be beneficial, perhaps because of the their physical layer (PHY) design and clock regulation. Just because the switch says Cisco on the front doesn’t mean it will neccessarily sound beneficial... I suspect it’s the internal architecture and design that counts.

Funnily enough, I my impression is that used 2960 prices on ebay have dropped quite a bit recently in the UK. I bought one a couple of weeks ago for £24 including delivery.

It might depend on the software build  (IOS) and version of course, as that is what can drive the price.... but that is a good price for a legit 8 porter.. and most here perhaps use in default non managed mode so the software build provably becomes largely immaterial... but I still hear the word is getting around....

ChrisSU posted:

Mike, I’m curious as to why a gigabit switch might be better, especially with a Naim streamer, all of which have fast Ethernet ports, as do most of the Catalyst switches people are using? 

I know Chris, I do understand why a 10/100 switch should be OK & why you ask,  but I have heard an obvious difference between Netgear 'F' & 'G' switches,   I'm in no way saying that applies to the SOHO Cisco switches or any other switch for that matter, , but at this basic level for the sake of a few extra squids,  why not.

My question to you is how did the Cisco 300 manifest itself to you as 'noisy' ??   

Mike-B posted:
ChrisSU posted:

Mike, I’m curious as to why a gigabit switch might be better, especially with a Naim streamer, all of which have fast Ethernet ports, as do most of the Catalyst switches people are using? 

I know Chris, I do understand why a 10/100 switch should be OK & why you ask,  but I have heard an obvious difference between Netgear 'F' & 'G' switches,   I'm in no way saying that applies to the SOHO Cisco switches or any other switch for that matter, , but at this basic level for the sake of a few extra squids,  why not.

My question to you is how did the Cisco 300 manifest itself to you as 'noisy' ??   

Mike, I was using Simon's LW radio test, which showed the 300 as being noisy, both its external wall-wart PSU, and the switch itself. The 2960 I use at the other end was absolutely silent using this test.

ChrisSU posted:

Mike, I was using Simon's LW radio test, which showed the 300 as being noisy, both its external wall-wart PSU, and the switch itself. The 2960 I use at the other end was absolutely silent using this test.

Thanks for the expl Chris,  I'm not completely convinced by that test; does a component pushing out some form of RF mean it is affecting audio system SQ ??  I'm not arguing that it does or doesn't,  but I would like to equate - somehow - with something like this test to a measurable affect on sound - hiss hum TuneDem  ....  ??    

I've run an LW & AM radio test with my Cisco SG110D only a few weeks ago when I was able to borrow a small enough LW,MW.SW radio to get behind my cabinet.  I didn't post anything on it as I did not find it convincing one way or other.  The original Cisco PSU had some noise, but the switch was at a lower level.  However the PSU I've always used with it is the iFi iPower & that has little or no noise per the LW & AM test, ditto the switch.  Bottom line is I cannot detect any difference in system SQ between either PSU - however I could (subtly) when I had a Netgear switch.   Plus I ran a switch swap test with a few friends a while back & that was far from conclusive.  

Reading other forums,  Linn & others appear to poo poo any notion that switches make a difference & then Lejonklou say its a specific Netgear or nothing  ---- now Naim say only a Cisco Catalyst is worthy ??

I remain, Yours Faithfully, Confuzed in Oxfurdshy'r  

Filipe posted:
Bunny Colvin posted:

 but it is harder to come by 2960s that aren't the 24 or 48 port versions.

I bought mine from UsedCisco in Germany for 50€ plus  carriage in Europe at 10€. Very pleased as it was refurbished and tested. No bidding needed.🔸I suspect that Peder and his Scandinavian group buy from them.🔸

Phil

Hello Phil 🙂.

No,not from them.We take our Cisco 2960's from a Company in Holland. They (Cisco's), are tested in a 26-step testprogram.....some Cisco's failed in this testprogram,as I talked about in another thread here. Refurbished an all other thing's of course.

Lifetime warranty,if you in some way have problems with your Cisco,they send you a new one directly,before you have send yours to them.

They only do,business to business, so you must have a VAT-nr if you will buy from them. It's because of that we helped our forum-members to buy Cisco's. This company is very good to do business with,but I think I can't write their name here.....forum-rules 😉.

/Peder 🙂 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:
Peder posted:

Simon

◾ Have you the same SQ from the 3560 or maybe better than the 2960?

◾ Is it,like the 2960 "plug and play" or must you do some more advanced installations.

◾ Can you give us the exact modelnumber for the 3560 you have

 

1. Can’t tell any difference between the 2960 and 3560. They are both Catalyst switches if that is relevant.

2. Yes from factory default, the switch will function like an un managed switch and be a plug and play standard layer 2 switch.

3. Cisco WS-C3560-8PC (PowerPC405) processor (revision A0) with 131072K bytes of memory.

Cheers

Simon

THANK YOU SIMON ,we are lucky to have you here, so we "dummies" can solve our network-problems 👍🏻😍.

Cheers to you too....

/Peder 🙂 

 

rjfk posted:

Hi Peder,

I did a lot of testing on this a year or two ago. I used three models of switch, all Cisco Catalyst’s. The WS-C2960L-8PS-LL, the WS-C3560-8PC-S (v01) and what I'm currently using a WS-C3560CX-12PC-S.

 

 

 

 Hope this helps,

Russ

Hello Russ 🙂

I made your answer/writing to me, a little shorter here,just so I also can say THANK YOU to you......it helps 👍🏻😍.

/Peder 🙂 

rjfk posted:

Hi Peder,

I did a lot of testing on this a year or two ago. I used three models of switch, all Cisco Catalyst’s. The WS-C2960L-8PS-LL, the WS-C3560-8PC-S (v01) and what I'm currently using a WS-C3560CX-12PC-S.

I tested with power-over-ethernet on and off on the switch, with various different software versions and with various configs loaded on the switch. The software versions were all within the 15 major release train including IP Base and IP Services variants. I did not regression test with very old images and this could be where the difference you are hearing is coming from.

I could hear no difference between switches and configurations but could hear a similar difference between and three models and the previous NetGear switch.

S-in-S posted around the time that he had a theory it was due to the circuitry in the Catalyst switches and how they ensured accurate timing of packet delivery. My testing would appear to confirm that. I wouldn't worry too much about the specific varient of Catalsyt switch, except for keeping to the compact versions which don't have a fan.

So any Catalyst switch, unless you know better keep it simple and don’t bother with any config, but if you do config it that does not appear to impact audio quality. For simplicity’s sake I would avoid multiple VLANs in a domestic environment if you are tempted but that route. Needless complexity.

I didn’t test VLANs in my testing for the above reason and if you do need PoE I’d configure it as far away as possible from the streaming ports. So in my scenario I have NAS and audio kit on the lower numbered ports and the wireless access point which draws PoE on the highest numbered port. The Ethernet cables are routed separately just to ensure no noise contamination between cables.

 Hope this helps,

Russ

if i understand well, you heard no differences in sound quality between 2960 and 3560 models?  thanks for clarify me rjfk.

Mike-B posted:
ChrisSU posted:

Mike, I was using Simon's LW radio test, which showed the 300 as being noisy, both its external wall-wart PSU, and the switch itself. The 2960 I use at the other end was absolutely silent using this test.

Thanks for the expl Chris,  I'm not completely convinced by that test; does a component pushing out some form of RF mean it is affecting audio system SQ ??  I'm not arguing that it does or doesn't,  but I would like to equate - somehow - with something like this test to a measurable affect on sound - hiss hum TuneDem  ....  ??    

I've run an LW & AM radio test with my Cisco SG110D only a few weeks ago when I was able to borrow a small enough LW,MW.SW radio to get behind my cabinet.  I didn't post anything on it as I did not find it convincing one way or other.  The original Cisco PSU had some noise, but the switch was at a lower level.  However the PSU I've always used with it is the iFi iPower & that has little or no noise per the LW & AM test, ditto the switch.  Bottom line is I cannot detect any difference in system SQ between either PSU - however I could (subtly) when I had a Netgear switch.   Plus I ran a switch swap test with a few friends a while back & that was far from conclusive.  

Reading other forums,  Linn & others appear to poo poo any notion that switches make a difference & then Lejonklou say its a specific Netgear or nothing  ---- now Naim say only a Cisco Catalyst is worthy ??

I remain, Yours Faithfully, Confuzed in Oxfurdshy'r  

Hi Mike, I posted my findings on this, but intentionally declined to mention anything about sound quality consequences. Call me a coward, but I'm reluctant to post any such findings based on subtle/marginal/imaginary differences! The spectacular, night and day improvements some have posted here from small changes in network equipment are outside of my experience.

I've been using the LW radio to locate noisy items recently, and in addition to my findings regarding Cisco switches, I tried it on a Netgear GS105. Even when powered by an iFi iPower, both the switch and the PSU were noisy. So was a 5v iPower I've been using to power a media converter. I also found quite a few lightbulbs that were very noisy, mostly compact fluorescents, but also a few LEDs. I didn't like the CFLs anyway, so was happy to replace them. Could changing out a dozen or so lightbulbs improve sound quality? I don't know. (Although I do know that my dealer turns off a row of downlighters in his showroom when he uses the dem room next door!)

Part of the problem for me is that I've changed so many things in my system and listening room over the last year, that I just don't think I can reliably identify improvements from any of these small changes. Now that my refurb is almost complete, I might try reversing a few of the changes I've made. Then if  I can hear any definite sound quality changes, I will stand up and be counted!!  

Mike-B posted:

 

Reading other forums,  Linn & others appear to poo poo any notion that switches make a difference & then Lejonklou say its a specific Netgear or nothing  ---- now Naim say only a Cisco Catalyst is worthy ??

I remain, Yours Faithfully, Confuzed in Oxfurdshy'r  

◾ Linn have moved from a Top-spec company with "Attention To Detail",to a "Good enough" company.The Dealer do a fast installation with "Space Optimization"......that's that. The sound is clean and clear,but......the rest❓ Linn don't care about racks,switches,ehternet-cables and so on, take no attention for "Attention To Detail" anymore 

Here in Sweden,....as from Linn, they don't care about switches and eht-cables.I have contact with most of the Linn-dealers in Sweden,they hear that Cisco 2960 is better in SQ against the switch that they have. But that's that....nothing more happens...I feel sorry for there costumer.

◾ Lejonklou,and the Swedish Linn-forum Selleri,they must open their eyes.They still recommend Netgear GS108 T.....crazy. Many members there,are also member in our forum,....AND, have Cisco 2960 👍🏻😃😂.

Before the Cisco we have another switch, that was better than "the famous" 🙄 Netgear GS108T. But Lejonklou and Selleri goes on with Netgear GS108T 😁😂.

And yes,I have write ALOT about Cisco 2960 on both Selleri and Lejonklout. Four or five has official, say that they have buy'd one cisco.

So, Mike-B,you don't have to be confuzed anymore,buy a Cisco WS-C2960-8TC-L.

 

Likes (1)
Flushingmeadows
×
×
×
×