Gustard R26 issues when connected to LAN

Connection with external Audio Devices
41

No, they don’t.
But in practice, the benefit for the sound of the system by the elimination of the electrical noise is greater than the cons of the induced jitter by the FMCs. And this is true even for the cheapest FMCs on Amazon.
If you want to improve the sound further, you should use audiophile grade FMCs. They are expensive, but with them, you go the extra mile.

What I say is not based only on my own experience. I’m using optical isolation for years, tried many things, and I exchange feedback about it with a great number of users.

42

You are very skilled in theorizing on subjects on which you have zero experience.
You did not invent the USB port. All my DACs have one for many years. I also know how to connect a USB cable, and do it occasionally.

43

I have plenty of experienced resources and technical acumen to question your subjective ‘authority’ in the context of your suggestions in this post… All you have to do is show how using a short optical connection you are proposing, performs better than a simple USB connection with galvanic isolation… The onus is on you to do this as you claim to be the authority…
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

44

I told you already that I have the galvanic isolator that you are using, I tried others that you recommended on some threads, though you never tried them, and I have FMCs of various qualities.
The galvanic isolator can not eliminate the electrical noise of the computer, even a very silent one, as efficiently as the optical isolation. It reduces the noise, but does not eliminate it.

EDIT
I did not try it only on Macs or PCs. I tried it on computers that run audiophile OS’, and on streamers.

45

Why add more components when simple is just as good or better…? Good earthing/grounding schemes and conscientious attention to component to component earth/grounding relationships will always be best practices… I know you are diligent about these things, however in the context of the OP’s scenario, there is nothing to be gained by using optical and by doing so increase the jitter potentials by virtue of the addition of the multiple signal transitions…
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

46

The only benefit in doing it is to have a better sound.
That’s all.

47

That is a subjective assertion only corroborated by your experience and your cognitive biases… It only has value in that context, until you provide quantitative proof that there will be an improvement for @mikeypas in his system configuration scenario,
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

48

I already said that you are very skilled in theorizing about subjects on which you have zero experience, and from time to time, about which you know little.
If it makes you feel better to believe what you are saying, good for you, and be happy.

49

Your mistake is in your assumptions and presumptions… :wink:
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

50

Sure, you are assuming without even the slightest basis!
To begin with, do you have a r26 to have a basis to assume anything or to presume anything about it?
No, you have a UB-something!

51

What does the DAC have to do with the optical connection you are proposing in this context? The DAC only operates on the data it receives… :roll_eyes:

My bias is in the form of qualifying your subjective assertion proposed to @mikeypas, that adding additional optical components to the digital-audio transmission architecture, will make an audible improvement in his playback experience… We would like to see the evidence that supports your assertion…
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

52

If you had taken care to read the posts on the thread, you would have seen that it was @mikeypas who raised first the subject of FMC in order to enhance the streamed sound of his r26.
Why did he do it? Because someone told him that they improve the sound. And it was not me, because I don’t know this guy.

53

This is the reality…
:notes: :eye: :headphones: :eye: :notes:

54

Hey guys! Just wanted to post an update:

yes, its true that I heard about the FMCs (notably on the forums of head-fi), and people have said it seems to have a noticeable difference. Conflicting information about the types of FMC, types of cable, single or multimode, simplex or duplex, etc., basically everything. People are now talking about cables and Finisar modules, that together would cost more than the U18.

I moved things around and plugged the R26 into the router (ethernet), instead of directly to the mac via ethernet. A3.5 and studio seem to be much happier this way, but I still get lots of cutouts, the software loses track of what is currently being played, showing wrong song, wrong time etc. but it happens much less than if R26 connected directly to the computer via ethernet.

So I am finally able to A/B : 1) usb → U18 → i2s → R26 vs 2) ethernet → r26
I ordered some FMCs and cables ($115total) just to test it out (they arrive tomorrow)
However, without the FMCs, I can still hear a difference

With USB and DDC : sound level seems a bit lower, sound seems more defined, instrument separation seems greater, more refined, less bass, sounds more technical

With ethernet: louder sound level, bass more pronounced but a little boomy, a “fuller” or richer sound, but a tad more muddled. More “fun” to listen to

Obviously my opinion or descriptions to others are meaningless, but I do hear a difference. I have those FMCs coming tomorrow, will try.

Even if ethernet +/- fmcs sound better, if I can’t get it to play without stuttering or constant problems playing using Audirvana, I’ll probably just stick to USB. Better sound doesn’t count if it skips all the time (for me - I know others have it working 100%)

1 Like
55

3.5 is a vintage player that Audirvana stopped updating.
Anyway, with Ventura, it does work fine with the streamer of the r26.

56

A3.5 or origin/ studio, i tested them all
maybe its my network setup, but then thats another rabbit hole to go down

57

And how the sound with your U18 DDC compares to a USB connection of the Mac to the r26?

58

Again, just my opinion

USB to R26 - sounds similar to LAN, nice richness, full sound, but somewhat muddled.
LAN to R26 - like USB, but even a touch more full, rich.
U18 to R26 - somewhat changes the sound signature, things are clearer, more separated, crisp, less bass, more analytical

Obviously i’m talking about minute differences.
I don’t think I’d be unhappy with any of these sounds, just knowing there is a difference makes me want to try out all the possibilities (within reason).

I’ll try tomorrow with the FMCs. Switching from one connection to another does take a little bit of time unfortunately, so a little hard to remember what the other sounds like

The amp is burson soloist 3xp with a 3a supercharger. I haven’t A/B without that, but essentially I got it for free (the supercharger) so I haven’t bothered to try without it since it has great reviews as well.

I’m hoping to just choose one connection and then be at peace and be able to start enjoying the music instead of constantly comparing , LOL

59

When you’ll set the FMC, you’ll be able to evaluate the sound with the streamer of the r26.
Since you have already the U18, you should try to further optimize it with the addition of an external streamer to your setup. Like this:

Mac > upnp (with the FMC) > streamer > DDC > r26

60

Ahh, don’t give me any further rabbit holes to go down!
Lol, I’m kidding.

Now please forgive this stupid question, but what would the advantage of an external streamer do?
Again, it’s all a desktop setup. all my equipment next to my computer and my headphones in that area too. I don’t really have a second location to stream to.