Ethernet Cables in for evaluation

I put the WW Starlight cable back in the system this afternoon after Cinnamon. As previously mentioned, its a nice-sounding cable, too, its very quiet. The most notable attribute compared to AQ Cinnamon is that the soundstage is quite a bit wider than Cinnamon; it extends well past the sides of the speakers; Cinnamon's soundstage does not extend past the sides of the speakers. And, there is more space around each instrument and voice in the stereo image. The overall soundstage is on the two-dimensional side in that its not particularly deep front-to-back. The musical presentation is very neutral but more on the lean, cool side of neutral than the warmish-side of neutral. Vocals and instrumentals are clean and crisp, but a bit spare in presentation and body. String bass definition and articulation is excellent, and a just a touch dry and lean. Some sibilants can be a touch hot and/or bright, depending on the recording.

 

Monocrystal copper? You mean single crystal copper? It’s sold in lengths like 50 millimeters and fairly large diameters like 20 millimeters. If Wireworld is selling something called monofilament copper audio wiring then it’s just a trade name. Wireworld seems to have its own trade names for every single part and component that is used to make a cable. Makes everything sound very technically good, but they’re just made-up names. I don’t think single crystal or monofilament copper exists as a source product from any wire maker. Copper wire of any kind is polycrystalline by definition, and there’s nothing anywhere in the metallurgy reading I’ve done so far to suggest that there’s any way to align all of the crystalline structure of long lengths of copper wire used in audio cables. The polycrystalline structure of copper wire is what provides flexibility and usability. Single crystal copper is brittle and has very narrow applications, none of them for long lengths of wire. I think anyone (or any company) that claims this is just doing marketing, because I can’t find any evidence of any copper wire besides polycrystalline copper wire.

There are a number of marketing claims that Ohno Continuous Cast has “better” crystal alignment than competing high-quality Oxygen Free Copper, but none of the claims are backed up by any comparative electrical or listening tests that anyone has been able to reproduce. Lots of anecdotes, plenty of them directly contradictory, and all of them on audio discussion forums.

Look, if all you’re going to do when asked a question is quote back Wireworld’s marketing writing you’re not really answering any questions, you’re just trying to help Wireworld sell more wire. If you don’t know the answer, it’s okay to just say so. No need to quote back what I am starting to understand is Wireworld’s made-up marketing talk.

All this testing and analysis by Wireworld and it doesn’t publish a single technical spec for any of its wire? That’s highly suspicious. So it’s okay for Wireworld to boast about its high-tech wire, but perfectly acceptable to not publish the associated specs? That doesn’t make sense.

Thanks for your BOM comments, but I seem to have given you the impression that I’m a technical *****. Sorry about that too, but I’m really just posting politely. I am discussing cables and trying to learn about them without injecting needless statements about my personal work, career or education background.

You also suggested earlier that the IEEE is wrong because nobody at IEEE or contributing to IEEE listens to cables. I don’t know how any human could listen to a wire. It’s just a wire. It doesn’t make sounds. It carries an analog waveform or a digital data stream. I only know one P.Eng and he’s got a house full of audio gear and really loves his music. If he’s representative of IEEE people, then they really do listen. I am trying to find out if all the electrical and electronic engineers have missed something now. I think that is not too likely, but I am still learning about this stuff.

Thanks for the offer of free Blue Jeans Cable. No need, but it’s very kind of you to offer.

 

Do you have a dealer near you that carries cables? I have a dealer a couple miles from me that lets me try a cable over the weekend as long as I return them unharmed. I havent tried any higher end ethernet cables, but I am running AQ HDMI cables on my cable box and 4k blue ray player. I did notice a better picture with the AQ cables and the better of the two is on the Blue Ray. I cant really see a difference between the two AQ cables on the cable box, but I can on the Blue Ray.

I dont think you are going to find a useful test out there. Folks that think cables matter arent into testing , and the testing folks pretty much say all cables sound the same. So, its either buy something like Blue Jeans and forget it, or try and find a helpful dealer who will let you try a higher end cable in your system. You may or may not hear a difference and even if you do, it might not be enough for that credit card to come out of your pocket.

I know this isnt the answer you are looking for, but I am afraid its pretty much the reality of being an audiophile these days.

 

Well one thing seems likely: Audioquest Ethernet cables climbing in the Google search rankings due to this thread.

 

It's well established that objectivists have poor sounding systems. The reason for this is that folks like you get caught up in a measurements only lens and therefore don't experiment with things that do make for good sound like a good foundation of line conditioners, grounding devices, and better cables. So already you are dealing with a higher noise floor and robbing the playback of clarity.

It's admirable to correlate measurements that do matter on sound, but it's dangerous to suggest things like ethernet cables don't matter. If you have deep audio experience, you realize that almost everything matters.

 

I used wireshark to analyze the audioquest cables and found the packets much more comfy than with the blue datacenter cables.

 

I sometimes wonder how much people chasing down rabbit holes like audio-grade Ethernet cables actually listen to music.

My experience is that, most tweakers have systems with one or more fairly glaring deficiencies they struggle to identify, much less rectify.

Of course, there are certainly people more interested in the gear, than listening to it.

Sort of reminds me of a guy that had me build him a custom PC for his photography business. Told me he was a pro, had lots of high-end equipment, etc. About a year or two later, he brought me the machine for a drive and O/S upgrade. When I was done transferring his data, I went to look at his pictures, figuring that would be the most important thing to him.

And to my dismay, I found nothing but pictures of his cat. Folders and folders of pictures of the same cat.

Literally tens of thousands of pictures of his feline companion.

If someone needs a professional cat photographer, I can highly recommended one.

 

It's quite the opposite in audio. The better your tweaks and components are, the more enjoyable the system. It's all about establishing a good foundation for the music. I get pulled in by system now and often have to be careful for when I visit the listening room, I don't leave for 3-4 hours.

There are a few "gear heads" in the hobby but they usually can be spotted easily as they typically have 5-6 records of female vocalists and don't play anything else. Often their systems sound poor too in my experience.

 

I remember Randi’s challenge and his ethernet cable listening tests at an audio show in the U.S. and the subsequent tear-down of the Audioquest and generic cables used for the test. In the lab, the Audioquest cable failed the CAT 6 test it was supposedly rated for and barely passed the CAT 5 test. The generic cable passed all tests and - encouragingly - both cables were indiscernible from each other. The ethernet cable standards are good enough to ensure that even poorly made samples like the particular Audioquest cable used at the time (improper drain, masking tape insulator, faulty strain relief) still functioned. IIRC, Blue Jeans did the bench testing under supervision.

Most of the so-called high-end audio cable makers were invited to participate in the $1M Challenge, but not one of them stepped up. Not one. I’ve privately invited a few cable makers to participate in listening tests at TAVES in Toronto over the years and at the Toronto Audio Show last year. I’ve offered incentives. I made the offer just to be able to say I’ve done it, but I never held out much hope that any of the cable makers would take me up on it. A cable makers separately replied with a demand for subjective demos that they could control and introduce and promote, but when I insisted on a blinded test in which not even I would know what cable was being used at any given time, they all went silent. The reason is that high-end cable makers know full well that they’re selling nothing but expensive audio woo. They’re not obligated to cooperate with me or anyone like me, so they don’t. Their marketing is successful and there’s no such thing as BS Police for them to fear, so there’s no compelling reason for them to jeopardize the houses of woo they’ve built.

The FTC or the CPO or CCPSA enforcement in Canada will eventually turn their attentions in the direction of consumer audio products, and then a whole bunch of the cable makers will end up out of business or worse. Building a business on woo and wishes is a terrible thing to do.

 

Nah, exact opposite. Like a guy I know that kept tweaking but didn't have the common sense to use a screwdriver to snug-up the drivers in his B&W 801 speakers (yeah, he had a loose midrange driver).

 

What utter nonsense. Your comment is needlessly insulting and blatantly wrong. I’ll put some of the systems I own and some of the systems I’ve set up for friends and audio associates up against any equivalently priced systems in the world. Great music reproduction is just that. Neither you nor any of your kind have a corner on great sound and great music reproduction.

The opposite of subjectivist is rationalist, not objectivist. An Objectivist (that’s the word you used) is a person who follows the now long-discredited philosophy invented by author and philosopher Ayn Rand. The philosophy has nothing to do with objectivity in the context of any audio discussion.

You wouldn’t know “folks” like @Archimago or “folks” like me even if your life depended on it. That’s obvious because your assumptions are absolutely dead wrong. I host music listening gatherings in which a wide variety of people with a wide variety of tastes in music, remarkable hearing (a number of them are professional musicians playing jazz or classical music for a living), mature attitudes tempered by age and experience, heavy investments in audio components, and startlingly large collections of cables and accessories of all kinds. In any given listening evening or afternoon, music will be appreciated, technical questions might arise, and audio BS is never tolerated. We want great music, not specs, but cable pushers like you (thanks to @Hooch for coining “cable pushers”) seem to want to insist on beliefs they can’t support or explain.

When you’re challenged on it you resort to moving the goal posts, criticizing systems, assigning attitudes that don’t exist and making up fiction. Shame on you. Audio - music enjoyment most importantly - is a passion, but it’s damaged by people like you who only seem to want to drive people to spend more and more money on cables for no good reason.

You apparently don’t know a thing about ethernet cable.

 

You are probably right about the glaring deficiencies but I doubt we will ever know.


On the other topic, you shouldn't judge, may be he was the photographer for this publication:

 

I don't mean it rudely, but I truly believe that audiophile ethernet cables are a scam, and I believe Wireworld and Audioquest know it too. It is truly flat-earther stuff (and not in that NAIM/LP12/PRAT way).

At what point does "keeping an open mind" just become an act of foolishness? I ask this question sincerely. Should one keep an open mind about something like this?

Machina Dynamica Acoustic Resonators set of 3 | Tweaks | Mosby, Virginia 22042 | Audiogon

Surely one can sniff out ******** before reaching the event horizon of gullibility?

 

Guys.. It's true! I just swapped out my blue Belden 3' patch cord for a 14ga Sheeplesound Bing Cherry triple twisted ethernet cable. Suddenly my text files come alive with an intoxicating clarity, the blacks are deeper and the whites are whiter. I'm able to see more defined edges regardless of font. When viewing images they come alive with a vibrance and warmth that the Belden cable was just not able to match. This cable is amazing.

 

Funny you mention that I was just thinking of running a Wireshark log on my network just to see what's out there. I saw the earlier post that mentioned a test of '$340: cables and I noticed that everything was being run through a $35 Netgear ProSafe switch. Folks would be amazed at the effect a switch can have on a LAN and just how much varience switches rated for a given speed have in throughput.

I am also always interested to see what may be out there that is especially chatty. So many modern devices that pride them served on self discovery, and as such are very chatty on the wire.

Almost no home networks are properly provisioned for efficient data handling (Mine included).

BTW, if you really are using Wireshark to troubleshoot, you need a hub to get the big picture. Hubs are becoming valuable commodities as they are near impossible to find these days.

 

In my case I am going straight into my AT&T router. Is there an upgrade for that?

 

Sure.. You can get a Cisco 9K. The sound is unbelievable.

 

Does the crisco have an external power supply?

 

On the contrary, I suggest people use older IBM token ring networks. Much like tube electronics, they produce a warmer and more lifelike sound. In general there are some 10 base T chipsets from the 90's that I think sound good, but once we get into 100 base T and gigabit the sound is all hollow and lifeless.

 

Don't you need to pair it with a solid Twinax cabling in order to reap the most of your audiophile token ring setup? In my experience it tighten the bass and widen the stage a lot.

 

Rolltide is really on to something.. I tried his token ring suggestion and served my audio files from Netware 6.5. I couldn't believe the increase in PRAT! AMAAAAAAAZING. Lush soundstage.

 

C'mon Claude.. We all know Twinax is snake oil!

 

Ahhh, you've seen the way - 6.5 is one of the best sounding Novell releases ever. Be sure to use the corresponding version of Lotus Notes to edit the metadata, though - the results will be audible.

 

Good luck finding a decent sounding Twinax cable, Claude. I've sent several emails to Furutech about them making rhodium plated DB9 terminations for my token ring, but I guess it keeps accidently going to their spam folder?

 

Guys. I've been playing around with several WAN accelerator products in my listening room, and for my money, the Riverbed Steelhead appliance brought out the most depth and widest soundstage I have ever heard! And for you measurement folks, Wireshark did confirm my suspicions.