Ted Smith said
The LANRover and the Regen are trying to do two different things. You system may need one, the other or none. Comparing them directly on paper doesn’t get you far IMO.
Both “regenerate” the USB, and in fact the LANRover goes further along this path than the Regen since it converts the USB to Ethernet - whether this difference makes an audible difference depends on the system and the user’s preferences.
The Regen doesn’t directly address jitter or noise but instead tries to generate a signal that allows the ultimate USB receiver to not have to work as hard to interpret the USB signal - it needs to be very close to the ultimate USB receiving hardware to do this most effectively. That signal conditioning is not an explicit feature of the LANRover. On the other hand the galvanic isolation and jitter performance of the LANRover isn’t design feature of the Regen.
The LANRover is principally designed to allow a network as a USB to USB bridge and to take advantage of the isolation and allow a longer distance than a standard USB cable. There’s more buffering in a LANRover than the Regen and that may or may not help lower jitter.
Ted Smith said
The LANRover and the Regen are trying to do two different things. You system may need one, the other or none. Comparing them directly on paper doesn’t get you far IMO.
Both “regenerate” the USB, and in fact the LANRover goes further along this path than the Regen since it converts the USB to Ethernet - whether this difference makes an audible difference depends on the system and the user’s preferences.
The Regen doesn’t directly address jitter or noise but instead tries to generate a signal that allows the ultimate USB receiver to not have to work as hard to interpret the USB signal - it needs to be very close to the ultimate USB receiving hardware to do this most effectively. That signal conditioning is not an explicit feature of the LANRover. On the other hand the galvanic isolation and jitter performance of the LANRover isn’t design feature of the Regen.
The LANRover is principally designed to allow a network as a USB to USB bridge and to take advantage of the isolation and allow a longer distance than a standard USB cable. There’s more buffering in a LANRover than the Regen and that may or may not help lower jitter.
Thanks Ted! I certainly wasn’t comparing the products as a whole - I was only asking about the USB signal integrity feature of the Regen.
I completely understand all the other differences, including the ethernet transformer isolation of the LANRover for breaking groundloops and leakage current loops etc, which the Regen doesn’t address. Huge advantages of the LANRover but I wasn’t asking about that.
So when you say the Regen “tries to generate a signal that allows the ultimate USB receiver to not have to work as hard to interpret the USB signal” am I correct in saying that this is not something that the LANRover does?
This is the only feature I was asking about. As you say they’re not the same product types as a whole. The reason I ask, is Alex of Uptone says (in the forum linked above) he needs to use a Regen after his ICRON Isochronous - he says the ICRON doesn’t address USB signal integrity.
So I wanted to ask if the LANRover has this as a feature over the ICRON.
Thanks again!