Ethernet Cables, do they make a difference?
I am more interested to hear why those who are hearing a difference in the sound of their files via Ethernet cabling think it is happening? The most obvious reason is the Ethernet protocol is failing in a way that is allowing corrupt packets to make it's way through the router and assembled to a file that fails the CRC check. This corrupt file is then being passed to the DAC. That seem to the only way that could happen. So the question is, how is it happening only for audio files going to your DAC but not happening for the other millions of packets being sent over Ethernet all over the world. |
jbny I am more interested to hear why those who are hearing a difference in the sound of their files via Ethernet cabling think it is happeningIf an explanation interests you, you might want to scroll up and read the post from @markalarsen that offers a pretty solid answer. It's at 05-01-2018 11:16am. |
@t_ramey Jay Luong of Audio Bacon does a terrific job describing the Black cable, in various combinations with other LAN cables, including SoTM’s iSO-CAT 6 filter and dCBL-CAT 7. Go to the ’My Favorite Combinations’ section (prior to the Conclusion) in Jay’s very thorough article / review: https://audiobacon.net/2017/07/09/sotm-iso-cat6-special-edition-the-flavors-of-audiophile-ethernet/ The Black cable can be chosen as part of the SE bundle but can also be ordered separately. If you are US based (here): https://sotm-usa.com/products/iso-cat6-special-edition |
clearthink - And that is why one of the loudest voices in this specific forum for some kind of valid testing required IN ADVANCE agreements with lawyers and a $25K USD wager because he is "owed" that by us yes they think the world owes them! Beautiful in Long Island NY USA... summertime.... any time..... |
For ethernet cables, I'd try putting LONG Cat6 UTP ethernet cables for each link. Think 10-15 meters for each individual link. Shielded cables that are grounded might make things sound better initially, like more resolution/details or smoother sounding, but it's messing with the sound. In contrast, the UTP may initially sound grainier in quick comparison. Do a blind test with material that has lot of percussions and drums and pay attention to the air and impact of drums and not which one sounds better/worse, but which one sounds more lifelike and natural.
You can still use shielded cables with floating on both ends, but a well made CAT 6 UTP (like Belden bonded) will be better for signal integrity over their shielded counterparts, especially in home environments.
This comes from experience with over 30+ ethernet cables of Cat5e, 6, 6a, 6a S/STP (various shield grounding) and on 3 switches, 3 routers, 3 bridged connections without routers/switches (various Apple devices), and various power supplies for the devices. I've used gigabit and 10/100 network devices. The cables were as short as 1 feet to as long as 60 feet. I was not fond of short ethernet cables, especially in long-term listening. In short-term listening, it's easy to get tricked. The longer cables sound more relaxed and fluid and not muddy, which initially may be thought as grainy, lacking impact, or lacking in detail when comparing with short cables or using shielded cables that are grounded. Another thing to pay attention to is the plane of the soundstage (at least how it sounds on my system). I find the longer cables less up front.
In the end, I prefer my Fast ethernet switch (D-LINK DES-1005) powered by Teradak LPS with long Cat6 UTP cables. I have my router, iMac, and network player (Bryston BDP-1) connected to this switch. |
gdhal"By all means, YOU propose the test methodology. I'll then decide go or no go. All reasonable replies considered" I propose a double-blind test to be conducted in public and designed here in this group please explain how the $25,000 USD will be handled and who will be acceptable to you in proctoring this test and please explain your "AMY>BOB" protocol and provide some reference to establish it's scientific credibility let's get this show on the road and offer some information as to your purpose in establishing the $25,000 USD offer and if there is any limit on the number of participants you are willing to accept within the challenege and please do not ask me for personal information because I have been specifically instructed by the Moderators to not provide it to you at this time. |
While we are conducting the $25K USD challenge let us also please consider if other's would like to participate and propose they're own test to establish the repeatable verifiable scientific establishment of audibility that gdhal seems to be so interested in here must be great interest in this and I applaud Audiogon for agreeing again to consider entertaining the public discussion of this test which had previously been forbidden it is great that they have reconsidered this matter for everyone's satisfaction and does anyone else want to contribute to the $25K USD offer! |
clearthink - I propose a double-blind test to be conducted in public and designed here in this group........I have been specifically instructed by the Moderators to not provide it to you at this time. You are very much aware of the correct protocol in which to handle this matter, so as to avoid any further moderator "instructions". That said, by all means, the blind test can be designed herein this group. Have at it. When you and the group are satisfied, submit it for my consideration. Once I accept it, conducting said test will be in public. I have already contacted a reputable audio shop (on Long Island NY). |
It is apparent that the Moderators have reconsidered they're position regarding you're $25K challenge so let's keep it all in public there is nothing no longer to fear! TYhe blind test should be done with an ABX comparator or an equivalent device they're a a number of these if you have already arranged with an audio dealer to participate in this test it is possible they already have one why don't you ask them and report back. |
clearthink - It is apparent that the Moderators have reconsidered they're position regarding you're $25K challenge so let's keep it all in public there is nothing no longer to fear! TYhe blind test should be done with an ABX comparator or an equivalent device they're a a number of these if you have already arranged with an audio dealer to participate in this test it is possible they already have one why don't you ask them and report back. I agree with ABX test. Please confirm the parameters of the ABX test conform to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test and that you agree to 95% confidence level (25 trials). In other words, please confirm you can audibly detect with 95% confidence that ordinary speaker wire is or is not reversed. I shall then reach out to you and the audio dealer. |
What do you mean by ordinary speaker wire? I do not actually know weather or not I can detect it on reversed direction or not I think it would be better to test the audibility of the cable first which is a more likely certainty of audibility and what I thought we have been discussing hear with the forum does that effect your $25K USD offer also there may be other things we can test with more people involved so lets' have a conversation hear about other things to test. |
clearthink - What do you mean by ordinary speaker wire? I do not actually know weather or not I can detect it on reversed direction or not.....Please refer to the scientific double blind test thread, with posts beginning from 03-10-2018 6:55pm https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/scientific-double-blinded-cable-test |
gdhal"Please refer to the scientific double blind test thread" There are 100's of posts in that thread just tell us hear what you mean by "ordinary speaker wire" and if you are open to other participants in the challenge perhaps willing to meet your $25K USD to attract more participants. |
@markalarsen - no baiting, trying to understand your configuration and what you imply by "Ethernet connected to DAC" From the "Bel Canto" web site: The Black EX Integrated amplifier is an all-in-one component designed in a custom plated high-grade aluminum chassis that combines high-level DAC performance and our custom amplification. The EX Integrated has the versatility to connect to any source with simplicity and ease, including MQA, Roon, DSD, and includes an internal programmable phono stage.Key work is "All-in-one" Device above combines many components in one (from the Ethernet cable to the analog output - simplified):
With so many components combined in one unit there are a lot of possibilities to get noises produced by digital components in the analog ones. Bad or even wrongly designed shielding of the Ethernet cable can produce audible effects so much spoken above. High Audio quality Ethernet cable may show poor performance in the data centre where throughput is important. High Network quality Ethernet cable may show poor performance in the audio system where no-noise is important. Both sides in this discussion are right! Period! I shall say it again - each setup is different! Mine performs the same on Cat5 and Cat<a lot> because... (drums) Ethernet cable delivers data to computer, computer runs media player, media player buffers input and sands steady data stream to DAC over the optic cable or USB cable. Optic cable facilitates that electrical disconnect in digital chain below DAC. |
clearthink - There are 100’s of posts in that thread just tell us hear what you mean by "ordinary speaker wire" and if you are open to other participants in the challenge perhaps willing to meet your $25K USD to attract more participants. @clearthink No need for you to continually write "$25K USD". I think everyone knows by now 😆 By the way, at the rate we’re going, I’ll need to tack on interest. 😅 To your question about ordinary speaker wire, refer to this article and search for "ordinary". http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm Basically this means you and I can walk in to home depot and ask the rep for wire to fix a table lamp. Something like this: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pyle-18-Gauge-High-Quality-Speaker-Zip-Wire-50/20551674?wmlspartner=wlpa&... |
If one thinks noise is an issue, they can and should test for that. Whether they think the problem is noise getting inside the ethernet cable or the noise getting out of the ethernet cable. I personally haven't found noise as discussed above, to be a problem in my setup with my Bryston BDP-1. I use an 18 feet AES cable so I can move the BDP-1 far away from my rack so no ethernet cable goes near the rest of the components. I don't notice a difference when the BDP-1 and the ethernet cable is in the rack or far away. In fact, I've tried piling 100 feet of Cat6 UTP on my DAC and interconnects, and noticed no difference in sound. I suppose my interconnects and gear is well shielded. It very well may make a difference in other people's setup. Similarly, I can play music off a USB flash drive, and use the ethernet connection for only interface control. I don't notice a difference in sound by the plugging and unplugging of the ethernet cable. If there is noise present, the unplugging of the cable should make it better. However, I do find a difference when streaming through Roon based on the length of the ethernet cable or the device/power supply used. Based on my experiments, I haven't been able to find conducted and radiated noise as an issue. Aside from shielded and grounded ethernet cables which are breaking the isolation, I suspect in a calm home environment, the differences in sound may be with how the signal is dealing with the PHY. Signal integrity could be at play here. It's hard to conclude anything without measurements, but still there are tests that people can do at home to test out various hypothesis. |
@zoom25 good explanation is here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bryston-bdp-1-digital-audio-player If player and DAC are separated Ethernet cable should have no influence |
Hello @acepilot71, I'm not sure what you are referring to specifically (what page/section) in that review? I use Roon and connect my BDP-1 via ethernet which further feeds my DAC. When I use the BDP-1's native MPD software and play music off a directly connected flash drive, it doesn't make any difference to the SQ whether an ethernet cable is plugged into the BDP-1 or not. It doesn't care what devices are used. In this setup, the ethernet is there only for controlling playback. However, when using Roon with the same setup, suddenly all these subtle differences start appearing based on the device, power supply, or ethernet cable (length) used. I'm not sure why this is the case .I have done a number of experiments to try and isolate variables and see if any patterns emerge. Some of the results make sense with the established knowledge, while other results go against what most audiophiles are doing and assuming as the culprit. |
@zoom25 my bad, for some reason I thought it does. Bottom line last link to the D to A conversion stage is important especially if DAC has small buffering and very specific to the individual setup @markalarsen I have USB toslink coax Bnc. I prefer toslink (just mentally) because it has no electrical connection with computer which is full of... noises. No noticeable difference with USB and I did not try coax or Bnc (because I’m lazy) |
@markalarsen I just compared your setup with mine. In your case Ethernet cable goes into all-in-one device which called DAC but it does it all including implementation of network protocols, packets assembly, buffering, playing D to A and so on... if parasitic noises cryp inside through the Ethernet cable - god knows where they can get into. In my case it all stays in the computer and pure (or purere) data stream goes over the optic cable to D to A. If media player on the computer doesn’t screw up the stream - it is all clear. If computer screws up - you have nothing. |
Mike Girardi, reviewer and Senior Editor for Stereo Times, says that they make a difference. Here is the review by Mike Girardi in Stereo Times that features our cable: http://v2.stereotimes.com/post/optimization-of-the-digital-playback-chain-for-network-players-with-nas-drives/ Quote: “The design, materials, and cable treatment process employed in the Revelation Audio Labs Prophecy CryoSilver Reference CAT7+/RJ-45 i2s Ethernet clearly differentiated itself as a state-of-the-art Ethernet cable in my final system configuration.” - Michael Girardi, reviewer and Senior Editor for StereoTimes.com This was an unsolicited review (I do not solicit “proffesional reviews” of my work, as I place far more value on the unsolicited testimonial of a typical customer / end user). Mr. Girardi subsequently sold his previous reference cable and our cable remains in his reference system. Brad Vojtech Revelation Audio Labs |
Mike Girardi, reviewer and Senior Editor for Stereo Times, says they make a difference: http://v2.stereotimes.com/post/optimization-of-the-digital-playback-chain-for-network-players-with-nas-drives/ |
When it comes to any shielded cables with metal plugs and shield attached to the ground, you most likely will hear a difference. You are breaking the galvanic isolation. It can sound better initially. Things will sound smoother, less grainy, darker and more detailed. It's bringing in noise to the player. You can do this test with a Cat6 S/STP or any Cat7 or Cat8 as they are similar and double shielded designs. I did this for multiple pieces. Buy 3-4 versions of the same cable in the same exact length. The only thing you change is whether the ground is still attached to the shield or not. You can break and remove the metal plugs on the cables. That way you can the same cable with grounds attached on both ends, one end, or no end. As for hearing differences between similar designs, please always pay attention to the length being used. IME the differences are more exaggerated at short lengths (less than 3m). Some of these cables work, but don't pass or exceed the spec, like a Belden bonded would. That would be one thing to look at. Hook each cable to a Fluke DTX-1800 and see how it does. If you have a good cable that measures well on a Fluke, then try multiple versions of it and just vary the length. You never see that type of control with these reviews. Instead, it's bunch of cables at different lengths. Provided the cables are well made, such as Belden bonded Cat6 UTP, I don't think they are making things worse/better themselves, but they are rather influencing the behaviour of the PHY (especially in most devices as they aren't using TOTL ethernet packages). So the problem might be with the PHY itself, and the cables are being used to fix/reduce the problem. I've done similar testing with SPDIF and AES cables. Same wire, same connectors, only vary the length systematically. They all work, but sound slightly different from one another. I tend to prefer longer AES and SPDIF cables with my particular DAC/transport as well. I think there should be more systematic control in these type of observations. |
| Post removed |
gdhal"Basically this means you and I can walk in to home depot and ask the rep for wire to fix a table lamp. Something like this:https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pyle-18-Gauge-High-Quality-Speaker-Zip-Wire-50/20551674?wmlspartner=wlpa&...
And you want me to compare this cheap inferior wire not made to audio purposed for $25K USD to what cable another one from your Home Depot store? |
👨🚀 gdhal ”I agree with ABX test. Please confirm the parameters of the ABX test conform to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test and that you agree to 95% confidence level (25 trials). In other words, please confirm you can audibly detect with 95% confidence that ordinary speaker wire is or is not reversed.” >>>25 trials? Are you crazy? That’s a lot more trials than even The Amazing Randi demanded. And he never lost a blind test challenge. Why? Because nobody can sit there and pay close attention for 25 trials. Not even for ten trials. Gimme a break. What a ripoff! If the differences are of the subtle variety nobody can pick the correct one many times in a row. That’s the scam. Capish? |
| Post removed |
@vtech2000 Hello Brad, Do you individually measure each of your cables on a tester (e.g. Fluke) and include the results? Have you by any chance examined signal integrity and PHY power consumption with your cables? Have you compared different lengths of your own cable, such as 0.5 meters vs. 2 meters? Did you find any differences? If so, which one was preferred? |
clearthink - And you want me to compare this cheap inferior wire not made to audio purposed for $25K USD to what cable another one from your Home Depot store? @clearthink - I understand you are now attempting to "save face" by pretending you have misunderstood what it is you and I have been discussing. Ask yourself why have I insisted on lawyers, a contract and an escrow account. It is to avoid any misunderstanding by clarifying the details in writing and be in a position to enforce the release of funds (if and when we arrive at that point). That said, the answer to your question is "no". The idea is not to compare the ordinary wire to something else. It is to compare it to itself, once its orientation has been changed. You know, reversed. This means plus/minus polarity is the same, however, the ends of the wire that are on the amp in test "a" are subsequently attached to the speaker terminals in test "b". Also, the ends of the same wire that are on the speaker in test "a" are attached to the amp terminals in test "b". Therefore, whatever the wire, there can be only one spool of it involved. From the spool we shall derive the rest of whatever wiring is required (likely 6 sets). Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to *reliably* determine that you are hearing a difference between test "a" and test "b" (i.e. know whether or not the wire orientation is/was or is/was not reversed). See the following response to Geoff, which addresses *reliably*. |
geoffkait - 25 trials? Are you crazy? That’s a lot more trials than even The Amazing Randi demanded. And he never lost a blind test challenge. Why? Because nobody can sit there and pay close attention for 25 trials. Not even for ten trials. Gimme a break. What a ripoff! If the differences are of the subtle variety nobody can pick the correct one many times in a row. That’s the scam. Capish? @geoffkait I agree in principal that listener fatigue can influence the test. The wiki article I’ve indicated indicates "QSC recommended that no more than 25 trials be performed". Twenty five is fair. There needs to be a high enough number (25) and high enough confidence level (95%) to ensure the person under test is not simply "guessing" their way through it. Please forgive me for not wanting to give my money away. Keep in mind, it remains theoretically possible that regardless of however many tests are involved, the person under test can guess them all correctly. Also, as I’ve pointed out many times, I can tell the difference between Amy > Bob regardless of however many times you play them, regardless of how quickly or slowly the duration between the songs are, regardless of the test type, regardless of time of day, temperature and ANY other circumstance. Therefore, those who claim a "major" and "not so subtle" difference when the impossible is stated, realistically should also be able to demonstrate such claim under any condition. Further, because it is conceivable the person under test can guess correctly or in fact can demonstrate the impossible, there is a chance I would loose. This is a chance I am willing to take. Capiche? EDIT: I forgot to mention that if anyone is unhappy with the terms, they are at liberty to decline and write "no thank you". I do recall my writing on more than one occasion, "there is no obligation" to prove anything. |
geoffkait - Anyone who agrees to your terms would have to be even more naive than you appear to be. I bet you have never done a blind test in your life. Actually I have performed blind testing. It really isn’t as overly complicated as you make it out to be, especially if the goal is merely to be honest with oneself. By this I mean there really is no need to prove anything. A simple "demonstration" of your hearing ability (or lack thereof) is sufficient. Besides, I’m not one who claims the impossible. 😂 EDIT: @geoffkait You didn't write "no thank you". 😏 |
