Audioquest $340 Ethernet cable teardown.

Most of the time, I trust only my ears when it comes to this hobby. I like to leave my eyes out of the equation when I'm A/B'ing stuff. I've proven to myself that my eyes mislead me time and time again. Embarrassingly so on one or two occasions! Knowing that has saved me some money over the years and it has also on occasion proven conclusively (to me) that I was hearing some differences even though I was expecting to hear none. That's always gratifying.

 

And the results of the listening test are in.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...e-340-audiophile-cables-make-no-difference/1/

Exec Summary - People couldn't tell the difference statistically.

 

I read the results last night and am neither surprised nor disappointed. These kinds of tests prove one thing - testing audio performance is tricky at best and the general public - hell even most audiophiles - will have a hell of a time picking out subtle differences (let's face it, no cable should EVER produce a "night and day" difference) differences in A/B/X tests. It's up to each person individually to decide whether a $340 network cable provides enough value for them to try it out and then further, to be honest and objective when they are listening to it in their own space to the music they are most comfortable with. I do not think that such a person would be crazy if they pick up differences after doing something supposedly inert to the audio realm.

 

That doesn't surprise me at all.

Bill

 

Forgetting about the predicable result, I'd sure like to hear directly from Audioquest as to the reasoning and justification for using masking tape (and not even properly cut cut masking tape at that) on a cable in any price range, let alone a $300 one. Makes you wonder which of the their other cables may have masking tape in them.

 

The rebuttal
http://www.audiostream.com/content/million-dollar-cock

 

I take it Michael's preparation for this was a quick spin of Marillion's Clutching at Straws album then...?

 

Me either, since it appears they didn't perform a valid ABX test.

John K.

 

Will there ever be a "valid" ABX test ?

Bill

 

No doubt Audioquest will want to quash any skepticism and their proxies will provide a full-on media offensive to dismiss the skeptics. Because James Randi (Fremer's mortal enemy) is in the mix, most of the Audioquest faithful will likely embrace the notion that their Ethernet cables "sound better", in spite of the junk science.

 

They used Grado RS2 headphones plugged directly in a Dell laptop as the listening setup?
Grado headphones plugged directly in a laptop for a test like this??? Really????

Grado headphones are not the right type of headphone to use for a listening test like this. Grado headphones have very noticeable driver ringing and housing ringing issues. Very noticeable. Those ringing effects create a sound in the treble that causes the sound to seem to move around a bit. The sound doesn't stay steady. That unsteady sound makes it even more difficult to ABX test than ABX testing normally is. ABX testing of subtle differences is incredibly difficult as it is. Why would you choose a headphone that makes it even more difficult? Use a Senn HD800 or something like that. A Senn HD800 would be much more suitable for a test like this. And use a really good headphone amp and a really good DAC.

The people who set up tests like this do not know audio. Someone who knows audio would not use Grados connected directly to a laptop.

 

If reviewer Michael Lavorgna's statement that the difference in sonics between the Audioquest cable and others is 'not subtle or slight' and 'as plain as day' then I doubt the Grado RS2 would mask such alleged improvements.

 

You may as well use Apple Earpods for the test by that logic.

I'm possibly going to upset some Grado fans by saying this, but Grados a very bad headphone for a test like this. I wouldn't use them for ABX testing anything. The Grado headphones add more variability to the sound than what is being tested.

 

Mr. Lavorgna's tenor sounds like "the people who did the test are philistines, so they can be safely ignored".

But I totally agree with @Ham Sandwich : The test should have used some kind of audiophile gear that uses Ethernet as a transport, which is the market that Audioquest is targeting with this product in the first place. Setting aside the Grado issue (I own and like a couple pairs of Grado cans), a laptop with audio chips on the motherboard has to be about the worst choice for test environment.

 

Exactly. The Defenders of The Faith will criticize any test before it even begins. This whole scenario, the idea that an ethernet patch cord is an "audio cable" that is subject to good/better/best, is so absurd its hard for me to even wrap my head around it. This is literally like saying one's car stereo can sound better/worse/different depending on how good the timing belt on the car's engine is. Forget anything about "it's just 1's and 0's", that's not even the point. There's so much stuff happening between ethernet cables and the input of your DAC, so much slicing and dicing and rearranging and reshaping of data, not to mention so much accounting for the "problems" a magic ethernet cable claims to fix, to even ask the question of it they can make a sonic difference is beyond crazy.

Anybody who claims any component of a TCP/IP network can be tweaked to provide better sound to music files being transported over it and can hear differences just wants to be part of The Audiophile Chosen Few, and should be laughed out of the room. And no, we don't simply lack the ability to measure the differences - if there were differences they could absolutely be measured beyond any shadow of a doubt, because the data stream that came out of the magic cable would HAVE to look different then the worse-sounding data stream out of the mundane cable, and since the data is going to a computer, it would be trivial to write software to measure it.

What makes hokey crap like this so disappointing is when people are trying to keep open minds about cables and the companies that make them, this issue just slams them shut.

 

Sorry for the threadcrap. It's Friday!

 

I see your point, but one could also argue that using the Audioquest on a lesser system should produce the most dramatic results as there is so much room for improvement. It would be nice to see if Audioquest conducts a similar study using higher-end equipment for balance.

 

I'm definitely not an audiophile and don't buy into 90% of the marketing, and just reading through this thread has me sickened a little bit. $1700 for a few SATA, network, and USB cables?! How do the people at these companies sleep at night knowing they are absolutely robbing their customers? $1700 in cables? A third of all the kids in America are living in poverty, and people are spending that obscene amount on somehting that doesn't matter at all? Or if it does, only in the ever-so slightest sense? Just to listen to a 35 year old song for the 5000th time? Just nuts.

 

My experience suggests that in practice, the difference that different types of digital interconnects can make is at best subtle, assuming that all cables being compared meet the applicable specification(s). YMMV of course.

But Audioquest is not selling those cables to people listening to music through their laptop's audio chipset.

Question for the thread: Is there an integrated DAC/Headphone amp (like the Oppo HA-1) that uses Ethernet as a transport? Something like that would be a good test environment.

 

Well uh, I'm on the record as not being a fan of obvious BS like magic ethernet cables, but let's not pretend life is so zero-sum as to kids are going hungry because my stereo is awesome.

 

I do like Grados for what they are. I own the SR315is. They sound neat with my Cavalli amp. I just don't consider them to be a good choice for ABX testing. If they had used the Senn HD800 and a good amp along with a good DAC then that would have shown that they at least might know a little bit about audio gear and what might be suitable for using for a test like this.

I have no opinion on whether ethernet cables could make a difference. I don't care one way or the other. It's not an aspect of audio that I'm interested in. I'm not invested in this aspect of cables.

My interest in this is that Ars took it upon themselves to do this. It's unfortunate that this is how Ars has decided to cover audio. It accomplishes nothing. And worse it burns bridges. Ars is going to find out that with virtual reality the quality of the headphone audio is going to be important. Virtual reality will be more real when the audio sounds more natural and real. And getting good natural headphone sound is going to require some audiophile help and knowledge. Unfortunately they're more interested in burning bridges and alienating audiophiles than they are in learning how to do good audio for general listening and for things like VR.

 

I didn't mean to imply a direct connection, just meant to highlight how disgusted I am by the way some businesses are being run these days.

 

Like I said up the thread, Audioquest invites mockery with stuff like this.

 

Financing available?!?!

That's f^&%&ing predatory and should be illegal.

 

Directional?!?!?!?!? HAHAHAHA