This is curious, optical reportedly superior to LAN cable, this my experience as well. So some will say this imagination, others will trust their senses. And then we have reports the transceivers in these optical devices don't all sound alike. Now we also have reports managed audiophile switches provide superior sound via decreasing network traffic. This all very curious, networks have impact on sound quality, networks have no impact on sound quality, take your pick. I suspect this thread could carry on and on with no conclusive evidence on either side, this thread will not provide the final word.
How can different CAT5/6 cables affect sound.
While is is beyond doubt that analog cables affect sound quality and SPDIF, TOSlink and AES/EBU can effect SQ, depending on the buffering and clocking of the DAC, I am at a loss to find an explanation for how different CAT5 cables can affect the sound.
The signals over cat5 are transmitted using the TCP protocol. This protocol is error correcting, each packet contains a header with a checksum. If the receiver gets the same checksum then it acknowledges the packet. If no acknowledgement is received in the timeout interval the sender resends the packet. Packets may be received out of order and the receiver must correctly sequence the packets.
Thus, unless the cable is hopeless (in which case nothing works) the receiver has an exact copy of the data sent from the sender, AND there is NO timing information associated with TCP. The receiver must then be dependent on its internal clock for timing.
That is different with SPDIF, clocking data is included in the stream, that is why sources (e.g. high end Aurenders) have very accurate and low jitter OCXO clocks and can sound better then USB connections into DACs with less precise clocks.
Am I missing something as many people hear differences with different patch cords?
- ...
- 96 posts total
A question for people who do hear a difference between cables. Is your streamer integrated with the DAC or is there a link to an external DAC? The answer to this might provide insights regarding the induced noise theory. Another test for those who run a long cable from the switch to the streamer, though this will cost about $25. Try running the long cable to a Netgear MiniSwitch located as close as possible to the streamer, with the shortest possible (shielded?) cable from the MiniSwitch to the streamer, minimizing any RFI pickup, and hopefully, the MiniSwitch will isolate the output from any noise on the input. My big rig's network connections are implemented by a Wi-Fi to ethernet adapter connected to a MiniSwitch and then very short cables to the Aurender server and the Bluesound Vault that I use for ripping and streaming. (The Aurender does not support Presto). |
Anyone who holds the mistaken belief that cables supporting TCP transmissions, routers, network switches and the like can make a difference in sound quality should be required to read the following before opining further: http://units.folder101.com/cisco/sem1/Notes/ch7-technologies/encoding.htm Followers of the "all-digital-is-analog" superstitions won’t likely read past the first page, so the TLDR is that TCP protocols guarantee error-free data delivery regardless of the vector on which it’s transmitted, thereby effectively abstracting the physical layer. That said, copper cables transmitting TCP can indirectly affect sound quality by hosting parasitic noise. As others have confirmed, this is easily solved by using SFP (fiber) in the last run of cabling going into your streamer. This prevents any ground noise from reaching your system by galvanically isolating it (fiber is non-metallic, therefore non-conductive, therefore it does not pick up or transmit EMI or RFI). Best practice is to keep all Ethernet gear in a utility closet / room at a remove from the listening room, wall warts and SMPS-powered computers and what not included (keep them on a separate AC circuit from your system), and run SFP fiber from your switch to your streamer. This way what happens in the utility room stays in the utility room, and inky black noise floors are yours.
|
| Post removed |
On the issue of networks and their impact on sound quality. Those approaching this from the science perspective, prima facie argument precludes yielding any validity to those reporting networks do indeed impact sound quality. Ignoring this and reverting to prima facie arguments is not good science. Quality scientific inquiry requires addressing this counter argument through development of more rigorous research into the possible causes for this variability. Simply writing off this evidence as some derangement syndrome, based on emotions and/or distrust of human senses doesn't pass muster.
Instead of retreating to the same old refrains, try to find explanations for why individuals hear differences with a multitude of audio streaming devices. Another option is to actually experience these devices in your own streaming chain. |
- 96 posts total