Jwm 12-25-2017OK. So then the network switch suggestion is applicable. And I see no reason why inserting it into the wired path between the router and the DAC would have any impact on what you presently do wirelessly, or on anything else other than possibly providing a sonic benefit.
I’m using cat 6 from my pc to the router which acts as a local network as it is not attached to the internet. Cat 6 then goes from the router to the internal M5 board of the bricasti. Which then converts and reclocks the signal via I2S to the chip. I call the router wireless because it allows me to use j river off the pc by j remote to my I pad.
Fsmithjack 12-26-2017This is a good analogy. As I said earlier, the signal that would be sent by the switch to the DAC is generated by the switch, and while it would have the same data content as the signal sent by the router, the waveform and noise characteristics of the signals sent by the two devices will differ.
It’s not about cleaning the signal it’s about sending one less dirty.
it is not less dirty because it was cleaned more but a bit cleaner to start with hence has a lower noise floor. Kind of like 2 clean cars. One was dirty and washed and the other never really got dirty but both are clean.
BTW, the GS108 switch that was suggested comes in both "managed" and "unmanaged" versions. As Joe indicated earlier, IMO the less complex and less expensive unmanaged version would be the way to go. Also, that device provides 8 ports, and you only need two, so I would suggest the 5 port GS105 rather than the GS108. You would simply connect it and its power supply (or an upgraded power supply), and be good to go.
Regards,
-- Al