2. cables
  3. 128927-305

Most Important, Unloved Cable...

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.  
douglas_schroeder
shadorne's avatar
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
@jinjuku    

"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.




 
willemj
1,036 posts
 
+1
jinjuku's avatar
jinjuku
226 posts
 
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.
jinjuku's avatar
jinjuku
226 posts
 
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. 

It's just some source> streamer>head phones. 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Yeah, high end audio equipment that is not well made. That makes a whole lot of sense. 😳
More to discover