Ethernet. I used to say the power cord was the most unloved, but important cable. Now, I update that assessment to the Ethernet cable. Review work forthcoming.
I can't wait to invite my newer friend who is an engineer who was involved with the construction of Fermilab, the National Accelerator Lab, to hear this! Previously he was an overt mocker; no longer. He decided to try comparing cables and had his mind changed. That's not uncommon, as many of you former skeptics know. :)
I had my biggest doubts about the Ethernet cable. But, I was wrong - SO wrong! I'm so happy I made the decision years ago that I would try things rather than simply flip a coin mentally and decide without experience. It has made all the difference in quality of systems and my enjoyment of them. Reminder; I settled the matter of efficacy of cables years before becoming a reviewer and with my own money, so my enthusiasm for them does not spring from reviewing. Reviewing has allowed me to more fully explore their potential.
I find fascinating the cognitive dissonance that exists between the skeptical mind in regard to cables and the real world results which can be obtained with them. I'm still shaking my head at this result... profoundly unexpected results way beyond expectation. Anyone who would need an ABX for this should exit the hobby and take up gun shooting, because your hearing would be for crap.
shadorne Since there is no audio clock timing information conveyed over an ethernet cable it can’t make any difference at all UNLESS your gear is crap (something extraneous affected by the cable used like grounding or load or digital noise related crosstalk on to the audio signal). Same for an identical file streamed on the internet halfway across the world or one from your local server.
Why can’t folks understand this?
>>>>Uh, there is no clock timing information conveyed over a fuse that is located right where the AC comes into the amplifier, either. Yet the fuse is directional. Imagine that! 😳 So much for that theory. Next!
Sigh! Yes of course digital propagates as an analog signal. The key is to understand that the threshold between a 1 or a Zero is so large and that checksum and other additional packet error checking information allows a packet of digital data to arrive in the memory of downstream devices perfectly.
If digital was not such an incredibly robust method of data storage and transmission then internet and computers and software would not function at all. What errors we do encounter are down to hardware or programming errors in the devices and switches themselves and not the ethernet wires which work to spec or don't work (in which case a dropout can occur).
>>>>That's pretty much the same ridiculous argument the CD industry has been cramming down our throats for the past 35 years. Perfect Sound Forever. But obviously the error detection/correction for CD is not perfect. That's why you can improve CD playback so much. Why should I believe any digital device is perfect just because it's digital?
"I still don’t have an answer to the video I made where I removed the Ethernet cable and the audio still plays and nothing changed about the quality of it"
"What happens to the SQ when the Ethernet cable is removed and the music still plays?"
@jinjuku,
The whole crux of your tiresome argument is that you can’t discern any audible difference between a $5 or $300 Ethernet cable. Well you’re not going to cause laptops are not designed to use as a dedicated source for high fidelity audio. No video or argument is going to convince or sway your opinion. I am sure you have heard the term ’garbage in garbage out’.
As @shadorne so eloquently conveys in every discussion, you can’t improve the sound from a faulty and badly designed component with cable upgrades...upgraded cables or any other tweaks are like band-aids to faulty components.
You read earlier, grannyring heard the audible differences in his tricked out Sound Science Music Vault computer,
"I changed my ethernet cable from a Cat5, if I recall, to a shielded CAT 7 and liked the change. Again, more relaxed and natural sounding. Less of that digital glare we sometimes hear. The USB cable used made a significant sound quality improvement/change. I ended up with the Curious USB cable. I tried several and the sound quality differences were easily discernible. The Curious cable was the most full bodied and relaxed and met my personal subjective sound quality needs"
May be you should conduct a A/B test with pair of Belkin Ethernet and USB cables vs. Wireworld Starlight Ethernet and USB cables on a decent dedicated audio server. You may be able to hear the audible improvements cables on 1's and 0's.
Take the advise of your buddy shardorne and ditch your crappy laptop. You can also read up on tons of discussion on Computer Audiophile forums on how everyone’s is trying whole bunch of band-aids to improve the sound from a laptop which only tells me one thing.....consumer laptops are not ideal for bit perfect audio nirvana let alone conducting A/B cable tests :-)
Can you answer one simple question, when the cable is removed and the audio still plays what happens to the SQ?
Why is this such a difficult question for subjective folks to answer?
That is indeed the crux of my argument:
If I came out and you couldn’t see your setup, only hear it, assuming you are using quality components with adequate buffer (and a lot of them do) would you be able to tell when the cable was removed but the music still played?
Stop the tap dancing, realize the non real-time nature of networked audio and attempt to answer the question.
Bottom line there is a reason you aren’t and because it’s a tacit admission that your understanding about how networked audio works is fundamentally flawed.
Is there an intellectually curious or honest subjectivist here that would be willing to actually trust their ears (and I mean ears only)?
I would be happy to answer your question if you tell me what happens to SQ once the info in buffer runs out assuming Ethernet cable remains out of the equation?
I would be happy to answer your question if you tell me what happens to SQ once the info in buffer runs out assuming Ethernet cable remains out of the equation?
What happens to your Youtube playback when your local connection has been down long enough?
What happens to your buffered audio while the cable is unplugged/plugged back in while never allowing for the playback to interrupt?
At least you are admitting audio is playing out of the buffer and not the Ethernet cable. It's a start.
Sadly, you are not willing to admit the importance of a cable carrying the digital bits to your buffer zone. Again, garbage in garbage out. You’re only focusing on the sound that comes out of your noisy $10 sound card within your laptop. Who gives a shit about the SQ :-)
Geoffkait: "I once had coffee at a diner in NYC that boasted World’s Best Coffee."
To which jujitsu replied,
"For a purported expert of what constitutes valid testing you sure don’t understand the difference between an entirely subjective claim (taste) with objective ones like increased sound stage, stereo separation, more defined highs etc..."
>>>>>As someone pointed out already those audio characteristics are not objective. I already addressed subjective characteristics in two posts. To clarify what I am referring to, and avoid confusion, the parameters I described included separation of instruments which of course is not to be confused with channel separation. I also included musicality, presence, air and sweetness. No one would dispute that some audio parameters CAN be measured, channel separation, frequency response, dynamic range to name three.
Now if Chord simply said "The world’s best sounding cable" they would have been fine.
I feel like the Ben Shapiro of Audio.
>>>>>You might feel like the Ben Shapiro of Audio but you sound like the Ben Stiller of Audio.
Ah! jinjuku...you finally got to geoff. He ran out of credible responses so he, like others here, resorted to name calling. Thought that was beneath him. Guess not.
I suspect by calling you the Ben Stiller of Audio, he meant you are a comedian or a joke. Not so! As I read this discussion you, jinjuku and shadorn are the only ones who come across as really understanding the technical aspects of how ethernet data transmission actually works. Everybody else is just bluffing....and desperately trying not to believe that they may have been deceived - by cable manufacturers, distributors, retailers, marketers, advertisers...and their ears. And their ears are the only ones that didn't make money on the deal.
I just wonder how music could still play with the network cable disconnected and how, just how, could the sound be the same with no cable. Hmmm. If there was only a way to store some of the music ahead of where it’s currently playing. Heck maybe, as time goes on, we could develop techniques that would store an entire track. Oooh maybe even entire Albums.
Whoa! Chill out! What we have here is really just an excellent example of an appeal to authority. You know, an illogical argument. "I know how networked audio works (therefore you should believe my test and my conclusion that there can be no difference among Ethernet cables)."
The problem for jujitsu is all the evidence from folks who have actually heard the differences among Ethernet cables. We are familiar with the refrain, "my test showed no differences and I’m an expert in such and such, therefore my results must be right!"
Exhibit A, these 3 random reports gleaned from cyberspace,
1. With my set-up of a Aurender N10 and Bricasti M1 I originally had from the router to the Aurender used a Cat 5e that my home was wired with and it was OK when I did only Sonos connect. But when I moved up to the Aurender and Bricasti it was not so moved to AQ vodka - Nordost at the time did not come out with there network cables yet so I went with AQ (also the diamond AQ is beyond ridiculous in $$’s). That was good until I got a demo with the new Nordost Heimdall 2 network cable that blew them all away. Bass was much better and controlled and the stream just generally sounded better overall. I would certainly say that the network cable does make a difference. I know many will say it does not but I know what I heard and smile.
2. I use Supra cat 8. To my ears it ’sounds’ infinitely better than plain vanilla Ethernet cable of any cat, and much better than an Audioquest Cinnamon I had been using. And it’s only $47 for a 1.0 m. run. Clean, clear, lots of ’air.’
3. So I purchased a couple of Surpa Cat 8 Ethernet cables. Used them to replace the generic Cat 8 and Cat 7 I was using. To my surprise, I heard an immediate difference. I was shocked. But it was evident. Clarity. sharpness in vocals. better resolution. tighter bottom. Although they might have been a bit bright. Not sure yet. I can’t figure it out. I wish I didn’t hear it. It’s doubtful I’ll go out and start listening to other Ethernet cables, but at $47 the Supra seemed to be a good investment. I won’t be returning them.
I heard an immediate difference. I was shocked. But it was evident. Clarity. sharpness in vocals. better resolution. tighter bottom. Although they might have been a bit bright. Not sure yet. I can’t figure it out. I wish I didn’t hear it. It’s doubtful I’ll go out and start listening to other Ethernet cables, but at $47 the Supra seemed to be a good investment. I won’t be returning them.
Great. Then you’ll be able to do this blinded. I had the Nordost Heimdall II 1 meter cable vs 98 meters of generic CAT 5 in a few setups. No one, when blinded, could tell the difference.
Again: What changes about the sound when the cable is removed but the music still plays?
Geoff chastises for "appealing to authority" and then he immediately turns around and "appeals" the the "authority" of three, random, unidentified cable reviewers. Who, since they said the cable made a huge difference, it must therefore be true. Baloney.
"Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence." Which Geoff does not.
"Geoff chastises for "appealing to authority" and then he immediately turns around and "appeals" the the "authority" of three, random, unidentified cable reviewers. Who, since they said the cable made a huge difference, it must therefore be true. Baloney."
>>>>>>You don’t even know what an appeal to authority is, do you? You don’t know what empirical evidence is either as we shall see below.
Then dynaquest wrote,
""Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence." Which Geoff does not."
>>>>But I do have access to empirical evidence. I just provided it. Hel-loo! You know, the 3 guys without impaired hearing. Duh! You apparently don’t know what empirical evidence is, either. That's two strikes. ⚾️ ⚾️ I can throw them slower for you, just let me know.
I was just hoping that Geoff wasn't going to give a pop quiz like he did yesterday. But don't you know it, now he is testing to see if we know what empirical evidence is. Lets see, does it have something to do with "The Empire Strikes Back"?
Empirical evidence is obviously what Geoff says it is. I can't wait for his rebuttal video where he, without realizing it, refers to himself in the 1st person.
I can see how a different cable could make a difference but ONLY with crap equipment. Just consider that there are electrical signals coming in and going out through the ethernet port.
If your audio device is crap then presumably the simple act of receiving a burst of signal or transmitting a burst of signal on the ethernet port may disrupt or add noise to the analog output. (Like transformer hum 60Hz power supply noise that somehow makes it to the analog out)
For such a crap device, perhaps a different cable will be less noisy who knows... it is hard to conclude anything with such poorly designed and constructed equipment.
The key is to understand that properly designed equipment will ensure that ethernet communications are totally isolated from the analog output. This is a MAJOR design requirement for a good DAC - just like channel separation, THD+N and other specifications - a GOOD design isolates everything that is not audio (power supply, physical vibration, remote control interface etc) from contaminating the analog output.
If your audio device is crap then presumably the simple act of receiving a burst of signal or transmitting a burst of signal on the ethernet port may disrupt or add noise to the analog output. (Like transformer hum 60Hz power supply noise that somehow makes it to the analog out)
I don't see, nor have seen any credible hypothesis promoted, how a $700 cable with 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) would mitigate this noise vs another like built, 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) where they both pass what the standards body deems as in spec.
Archimago's glimpse into this bears this out. Even with a 50' cable.
I went extreme and used 315 feet.
This whole 'directionality', 'crystal grain boundaries', for Ethernet is BS. 99.99999% of the connections the global Internet runs on (where the connections are not fiber) are going to be ETP copper, CCA, or something else.
Here is the basic sentiment that is conveyed where subjectivists make claims about either people or their setups (both they’ve never experienced, which is what I willing to do):
I heard from three spoon benders that they can bend spoons. Why wouldn’t you trust the spoon benders that said they can bend spoons?
If you can’t bend spoons it’s because either you or your spoons suck.
"I don't see, nor have seen any credible hypothesis promoted, how a $700 cable with 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) would mitigate this noise vs another like built, 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) where they both pass what the standards body deems as in spec. "
Agreed. However if you accept that equipment is badly designed and faulty (contamination from TCP/IP communication is reaching the analog out) then a mere change of cable might influence things in an unpredictable manner.
I am convinced that some anecdotal reports are pure placebo (result of parting with $700) effect but many others are actual equipment issues that happen to be identified or brought to a users attention when swapping out cables.
Do not underestimate the amount of badly built equipment out there. Manufacturers read the latest DAC chip instruction manual and throw a DAC together with a gorgeous looking faceplate and there you go. Analog audio designers are often challenged when faced with advanced digital circuitry, ethernet, USB, firmware etc. - the possibilities for overlooking error and contamination sources multiply in digital.
Agreed. However if you accept that equipment is badly designed and faulty (contamination from TCP/IP communication is reaching the analog out) then a mere change of cable might influence things in an unpredictable manner.
This may be true for more analog components where vendors design and roll their own analog topologies, Ethernet is a different beast where you are only getting PHY’s from a handful of companies. These companies release these PHY’s with reference layouts that you need to use because they are there for SI, power efficiency, and meeting spec.
Out of 100 meter standard most pre-packaged solutions AFAIK of boutique cabling is 3, maybe 4 meters, with the majority being 1 or 2 meters as more the norm.
If they are all in spec cables, they are in spec. Even green Ethernet Switches that reduce TX / RX power is for 40 meter or less runs.
SI and power envelope isn’t an issue at 1-4 meters. If your connecting through structured wiring in the wall then that last 1-4 meters really isn’t going to matter much since you will only ever spec out to what is the weakest link regardless of how much is spent on a patch cable.
I think crap gear is going to perform equally bad with two same constructed, same length, spec passing Ethernet cables.
I am convinced that some anecdotal reports are pure placebo (result of parting with $700) effect but many others are actual equipment issues that happen to be identified or brought to a users attention when swapping out cables.
Do not underestimate the amount of badly built equipment out there. Manufacturers read the latest DAC chip instruction manual and throw a DAC together with a gorgeous looking faceplate and there you go. Analog audio designers are often challenged when faced with advanced digital circuitry, ethernet, USB, firmware etc. - the possibilities for overlooking error and contamination sources multiply in digital.
Thats fair. I’ve done enough installations with NAIM, Lumin, Oppo, TEAC, DM Holdings, now that those are the manufacturers I would recommend as having properly implemented gear.
Still the logic of my offer has been such that no one is willing to take me up on it.
What DAC or streamer, with HP out (I have AKG 701's), can I get that would be this night and day difference with two like Ethernet cables but one of them being boutique?
That way the room is out of the mix, the pre-amp is out of the mix, the amp is out of the mix.
""I don't see, nor have seen any credible hypothesis promoted, how a $700 cable with 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) would mitigate this noise vs another like built, 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) where they both pass what the standards body deems as in spec. "
"All of the anecdotal reports are pure placebo (result of parting with $700) effect but many others are actual equipment issues that happen to be identified or brought to a users attention when swapping out cables."
You say placebo. I say evidence. I win. Take two placebos and see me in the morning.
A place to start is forums where those with certain DACs claim a big difference with a reclocker or audio USB bridge.
I would have expected at least one person here to be able to accept your challenge but alas nobody is confident enough of their ears or what they think they heard.
I have read that the Holospring DAC sounds much better with a Singxer SU 1
I have heard only very subtle differences on other systems / certainly too small to pick reliably in a blind test. I put it down to better jitter rejection which can be very subtle to hear.
I was totally unable to hear a difference on any of the digital inputs on my DAC (USB, optical, coax) with or without an audio bridge (Singxer SU 1).
"I was totally unable to hear any differences on any of the digital inputs on my DAC (USB, optical, coax) with or without an audio bridge (Singxer SU 1)."
Whatever. You cannot prove it, in any case, either some or all are explained by placebos. You also claimed many of the rest of the positive results were probably equipment issues, which you can’t prove, either. It’s just the usual ridiculous crap naysayers come up with to try to save face. One assumes you would agree, however, that the remaining positive results, subtracting the ones you claim are placebos and the ones you claim are equipment issues, are real positive results. Well, now we’re getting somewhere! 😄
I didn't see your explanation of how the sound keeps playing with Ethernet cable unplugged?
I take it you are totally stumped 🤔 ?
The reason is ethernet data is transmitted asynchronously to the buffer on demand and when the buffer is lower the device will call for more data. There is often enough buffered data to play for about 30 seconds😆.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
