As a follow-up to the hypothesis I stated in my previous post, here is a quote from another post I had made in the "Most Important Unloved Cable" thread:
It should be noted, though, that Bryon's experience involved an Ethernet cable that was connected directly to one of his audio components, not to a computer that was in turn connected to the audio system.
Regards,
-- Al
Almarg 3-19-2017
Those reading this thread may wish to also read a series of posts beginning around 2-16-2012 in the following thread:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/shielding-components-from-emi-rfi-help-please
Member Bryoncunningham, who IMO is an especially astute and perceptive listener, and is very thorough in his evaluations, described realizing a substantial sonic improvement by changing from a garden variety unshielded ethernet cable to an **inexpensive** shielded type. I described some technical effects which may have accounted for that.
Also, this thread will be of interest:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/are-my-cat5-and-router-my-weak-link
A comment Bryon made on 8-7-2012 in the latter thread:
I can confirm what Al has reported about my experiences when I replaced an unshielded Cat 5 cable with a shielded Cat 6 cable. The result was more resolution. A lot more.As I’ve said in a number of past threads, the existence of differences does not necessarily mean that more expensive = better results.
The $7 shielded Cat 6 cable resulted in a bigger improvement in SQ than several $1,000 power cords and several $2,000 interconnects. Yes, I know that sounds crazy. I can’t explain it.
I’m not saying that other systems will benefit similarly. In fact, I doubt it. But it’s certainly an affordable experiment.
It should be noted, though, that Bryon's experience involved an Ethernet cable that was connected directly to one of his audio components, not to a computer that was in turn connected to the audio system.
Regards,
-- Al