Ethernet Cables in for evaluation

Careful!

I can state from first-hand experience that being "liked" is not necessarily a good, or even acceptable thing. I had way more likes than that for a post in a power cable thread and it got deleted by a mod and I was banned from the thread with a the riot act read to me via PM.

Perhaps if I'd used more smiley emojis with it?...



Jeff

 

Well, we should compare apples to apples. If someone not just claims that his wife is beautiful and the best women he can think of (statement many of us can relate to), but

1. Claims that if you never tried many different wives you can never have a good one.
2. Asks everyone to try his wife for just a shipping cost.
3. Claims that she is so good because she is made from dark matter and arrived from another universe.
4. Claims that he can never recognise his wife by blind test and that's OK
5. Claims that wives of other participants are ugly simply because they have bad taste in wives or blind

In this case I can only assume that responses will be way more harsh then in this thread.

 

This takes us to a good point that I haven't seen in the thread:

If you have a device like the Schiit Modi 3 that is susceptible to aberration of output based on about any power or usb cable you throw at it and you swear to god you are hearing differences... I find it quite hilarious that when someone says they can hear the difference in all this passive componentry that they haven't considered that the 180 of someone elses system isn't resolve enough or their hearing sucks is that you've finally managed to **** up your own playback chain enough to finally 'get you there'.

 

You asked. I think it's one of the most ludicrous things I've ever read on this forum. You're really equating disagreement over an ethernet cable with serious, personal online bullying? That insulting a person's spouse is equivalent to questioning ethernet cables? Wow. Just wow.

I imagine many posts on this thread (including this one) will be gone shortly.

 

yeah that's some transparently disingenuous editing there, removing my actual response.

 

This is some of the worst threadcrapping I have ever seen.

 

Right...so...if one wants to blame, let's share the blame equitably, right? (And I don't find much in this thread including the OP "blameworthy" to begin with).

Yeah, why would I have a problem with you posting any user report at all?

Over on the ASR forum I've posted my impressions of my tube amps vs solid state. Some accept the plausibility of what I seem to be hearing, a few are dubious and believe it's likely more due to expectation bias vs any real sonic difference. Hey, that's cool. I'm open to being wrong. And the skeptics aren't just slagging me: they are giving me a combination of technical reasons along with their expertise in electronics, building, testing tube and SS amps, to make their case. And I find their experience to be very interesting and enlightening in some regards. So, the more opinions the merrier, in my view. But some people seem to have less tolerance for disagreement or other viewpoints (or even wanting to accept they could be wrong).

You are conflating different issues here.

The first issue is whether anyone ought to go about auditioning and purchasing equipment however he wants. Of course! I've re-iterated that many times!

(And when you wonder why threads like this go on, part it is because people join the thread and repeat similar confusions, which bring on clarifications again).

The other issues are things like:

1. Are the technical claims made for the product actually viable? And in that case:
2. Is the product ACTUALLY likely alter the sound of a hi-fi system?
3. People can imagine things that aren't there - which is part of the life-blood of the fringier aspects of high-end audio, as it is with fringe/alt medicine or plenty of other areas.

Now, some audiophiles just don't care about those 3 issues. They simply say "I'll try it and if I believe I hear something I like, I'll buy it. Done."

Some care, but are fairly technically naive and can be easily swayed by technical-sounding snake oil. Some care but are aware they don't quite have a grasp of whether the claims are sound, and they may open to information and views pro and con. Others care and have some good technical grasp of or experience with the technical claims, and they can offer relevant input on the matter.

And all that is relevant to people who want to make advised decisions on how to spend their money. One audiophile may say "I don't care about any evidence to the contrary, I only care about what I believe I hear." But others, like myself and other members, prefer to consider the wider story when deciding how to spend money. So reading counter-evidence to claims that expensive cables improve the sound is actually quite useful. To each his own - but why should only one audiophile's approach - "my ears tell the truth!" get all the bandwidth? (And that was Puma's claim - he wasn't making a case for his imagination; he said the improvements were huge and that anyone here would hear them).

As someone already pointed out: why would you want to dictate what others post and how much?

Many threads exist on these topics because people are interested! Most topics have been covered plenty of times. So what? Those interested in the particular topic will tend to engage on the subject...that's human nature. You may as well say "why re-visit listening to an album you've already heard before?"

Would you like someone looking over your shoulder telling you not to read or post anymore in this thread? Why should their level of interest - "I find that repetitive and boring!"
- have a bearing on what you find interesting?

And yet...manufacturers claim to give explanations for how their products work, including the tweaks! So what you just wrote implies the manufacture's explanations are "not credible." Why in the world should someone looking to figure out how to spend their money not care that the claims for a product are not at all credible? This seems like some call for audiophile consumers to simply be credulous.

Again: we will write, and expand on previous points, or engage new ones, as we like. If that doesn't please you, maybe these threads aren't for you? (But clearly they are, since you have participated quite a bit...and I'm glad you have!)

As to no one ever changing his mind, that's incorrect. True, some people engaged in direct dialogue can dig in their heels, and some will never budge. However, not everyone is obdurate, and some people really care to learn what they can from looking at various viewpoints. I have certainly taken in plenty of useful information for my own purchases, by conversations just like these. And just as many people have been swayed by subjective user reports of speakers, amps, cables to try such gear, many have reported directing their time and money differently, and happily, by seeing the skeptical cases. (Tons of people have ended up at ASR for instance, reporting major changes in their views, and in what type of gear they are now interested in). So this "nobody changes their mind" meme that so often raises it's head is simply wrong.

Cheers.

 

Jumping in here... wanted to give props to people's typing skills, and dedication to the Cause.

 

My two typing fingers thank you.

 

Both middle fingers?

 

Gosh, I hope we don’t get in to cryo’ing anybody similar to what some do to cables!

 

Not to mention that any audiophile who equates Ethernet cables with the same emotional attachment a man has to a woman is...well...probably a bachelor ;-)

 

I kind of alluded to it - but not in real world, practical terms because that's not really what I do - when I pointed out how embarrassed I'd be if I were a designer who put our product that wasn't able to handle that kind of variance in power/noise when everything is in spec.

 

"After the modest break-in period, I was able to listen to him/her for hours without fatigue..."

 

Kids today will never understand how great Token Ring sounded...

 

Or the pain of having the token fall off in the middle of a song...

v

 

This is the first post on this thread in many pages that I have agreed with.

As you state, @Puma Cat got so sick and tired of this thread, and the abusive and ignorant nature of so much of the content, that he effectively withdrew from SHF. Thankfully he did so only after having a more civilised and constructive dialogue with myself and others by PM, a dialogue that I thoroughly enjoyed.

Frankly the way this thread has continued tempts me to do the same as Puma Cat. We now have people arguing that the SHF rules are wrong and/or that they should not apply to 'me'.

This has been a really difficult year for everybody and sadly it seems to have brought the very worst out of many people here.

 

"abusive and ignorant?"

That seems a bit dramatic. Puma's original claims were mostly met with quite civilized questions and responses. It sounds like those terms are being used to describe those who dare question anything about Puma's claims. That is most often what I see when these type of subjects come up. Someone posts a claim about something making obvious differences in a system on a purely subjective basis, and if anyone dare voices skepticism, it's seen as uncouth and "abusive." This blind spot - one person's viewpoint is fine and will brook no challenge, another view that is skeptical is just muckraking and "the bad guys," is part of the way friction actually arises in cable threads.

Take note: which side of the debate has been denigrating the hearing ability and/or gear quality of the other?

When you consider why this is, I think you should see the pertinance of the points I've been making about why cable threads tend to go this way.

Again: Puma cat started a thread to tell everyone that an expensive Ethernet cable dramatically changed the sound of his system. HE mentioned skeptics and claimed that skeptics themselves would hear the difference too!

What, in any practical reality, do you think would, or should, have followed from that?

He challenged the skeptical viewpoint...but no skeptical response or questions about his claim are allowed? Is that how you think forum threads do, and should work?
I'm trying to get you to consider both sides of the dynamic here, because I think this one-sided view is really part of the problem in many forum disputes where people get insulted and mad merely on the fact their claims are even challenged by people with another view.

But is your assessment of the "worst" people possibly biased in the way I've suggested above?

For instance, I'm presuming you are referencing my posts in the above quote. Do you think you have characterized my stance charitably and accurately? I immediately gave my profile as I said I would if a mod asked. And I wasn't arguing simply that MY equipment profile wasn't going to help mitigate the type of disagreement on a thread like this but that IN PRINCIPLE anyone's profile is not going to help decide these things. I gave the argument why, and even demonstrated why. And clearly many agreed. it's clearly became a pertinent discussion to the thread, since the demand had been made to see equipment profiles in order to comment.If I'm wrong, you could explain to us how instead of simply insinuating it was emblematic of some bad character.

Further: My position has continually been stated: That I am NOT arguing that someone like Puma Cat shouldn't audition equipment as he enjoys and sees fit, that I fully support whatever method he likes. And that I support his posting his experience, even if purely "subjective." And that no one should tell other people how to spend their money.
And I have said that I am fully open to being wrong on this or any other similar issue. Yet I have also dared to give my own reasons for why I'm skeptical of the Ethernet cables (etc) and why I wouldn't spend MY money on them. After all, remember: Puma Cat mentioned skeptics and claimed we would hear differences too!

Is that really, to your mind, a viewpoint that exemplifies "The Very Worst" of people?

Cheers and happy holidays! (or Merry Chrismas!)

 

In my practical reality, the skeptics would (if they were really interested in whether different ethernet cables might change the sound of their system) experiment with at least two different ethernet cables in their system, possibly at different price points and/or with differing construction/shielding/connectors, etc, to see if indeed they could hear any differences. They might vary in cost but not necessarily be outrageously expensive.

As a skeptic new to the world of USB cables, and after reading a similarly ridiculously contentious thread here on USB cables (I have no use for an ethernet cable in my system) that is exactly what I did. Used a $10 USB cable from the computer store and then bought a 5 metre $75 USB cable from China off Ebay (appears quite likely to be made from Furutech GT2 USB cable which would normally sell branded for around $285) to see if I could hear a difference. End result: I did. I think the cable I bought off Ebay sounds better. This is my opinion of course and, as you and others have pointed out, I may be delusional. I also think that some might actually prefer the sound of the $10 cable due to a) subjective listening preferences and b) system synergy and interaction.

The USB cable thread was on a $1000 USB cable. I did not feel the need to buy a $1000 USB cable then, nor do I feel the need or desire to buy one now. On the other hand I may try out another USB cable in the $75 to maybe $125-$150 (I want a 5 metre cable) range to see if things might further improve for me.

By the way, there were many posters in the USB cable thread whom I found were very credible in terms of hearing differences in USB cables (which supposedly operate in the same bits are bits way that ethernet cables do) as well as a very, very small number of posters (also credible I thought) who had tried a number of USB cables and heard no difference.

But 90%+ of the so called "skeptics" in that USB thread and also in this thread seemingly have no interest in doing that. The only conclusion that I can draw from that is that they are much less interested (if interested at all) in finding out whether there are actually sonic differences in the cables than they are in rattling someone's chain on the internet. So they're not really skeptics, although they might be pretending to be one on the Steve Hoffman forum.

Your conclusion (and practical reality) is obviously thus very different from mine Matt, and you, and others have made it abundantly clear in your multiple, lengthy posts. I think it's fair to say that pretty well everyone understands your position at this point. As a few others have pointed out, nobody is asking anyone to jump off a cliff or out of a flying airplane without a parachute here.

 

Cool. You did it your way. Others do it their way. And we can all give our own reasons. Is that a big deal? I hope not.

And notice I have not cast aspersions on your gear, or your lack of acuity in your hearing. Nicer that way, isn't it?

Indeed. That would be needlessly dramatic, and I don't remember anyone being that dramatic.

Unless, of course, you count when someone recently in the thread compared declaring enthusiasm for a new cable to someone declaring how much he loves his wife.

But, if I remember right...that didn't come from a cable skeptic ;-)

Cheers, glad you found your way of enjoying your system.

 

I inherently have a problem with snake oil products. I have such a significant problem with them, I won't buy a legitimate product from a company that also sells snake oil products. I don't have a lot of patience for companies using pseudo-science and pseudo-engineering to mislead or overstate what their product actually does. I'm not going to just give something a try when I know the underlying principles behind the product are dishonest. Just like how I'm not going to just give homeopathy a try. It's just water, so it is harmless. I I don't care what the return policy is on a homeopathy product. I'm not going to use it.

I'm a skeptic on digital cables in general. I don't think they matter unless you replace a broken or out-of-spec cable with a not-broken and in-spec cable. Frankly, if they did somehow make a difference in the system, I would question if that system is broken or has a really poorly designed component in it. The description that people come up with for the difference is so absolutely disconnected from how a digital cable works. I've tried coax cables that range in price from "free" to maybe $150 in a 6ft length. They sound the same.

USB cables cover a weird middle ground. In some configurations they are also power cables. They can also short together power planes between devices. It's way more likely that an ethernet cable matters. It's also unlikely that the difference is related to the transport of bits.

 

If the noise is coming from the DAC's power supply leaking into the analog stage, why would wrapping a soldering cord around the incoming ethernet cable effect this?

 

no. electrically it is an analog square wave, subject to the analog world.

 

What makes you think sceptics haven't been through a good number of cables? I'm pretty certain that most have.

For my purposes, I've been through over a dozen interconnects, from £5 to £220, a number of USB cables, including an Audioquest Cinnamon, two audiophile mains power cables and have recently taken delivery of a CAT7 ethernet cable.

My current cabling is thus:-

- Fisual Havana XL and Rio Interconnects and optical cables

- Standard mains cables to all components

- CAT7 ethernet cable in place for now as it's just arrived, but likely to replace it with the CAT5e that was there before.

I've been through this time and again, but always come back to the same core issues for me; reduce distortion, best speaker placement for the room, gear well setup and looked after, good masterings....and that's it.

We enjoy good power supplies in the UK barring the occasional exception, so don't suffer the issues that seem to affect areas of the US.

Others' views clearly differ, but I rather refute the claims we often hear around gear not being up to the job. This pretty much echoes what Matt mentioned earlier. With a pair of active speakers that retailed at £1500 D2C or £2000 when they later went into the dealer network, I've enough faith in them to highlight differences and likewise in the source gear I use.

 

I apologize for not being precise in my language. In this case, I mean the power supply for the analog stages in the box, not the power brick outside the box. The board inside the box has a to generate multiple DC supplies for the various components. The DAC chip inside the box has an analog ground and an analog supply input. The analog output from the DAC goes to an amplifier on the board, which drives the RCA's. This amplifier has to have a supply voltage as well. The filtering on these supplies is generally not great at filtering low frequency noise, like at 60Hz. 60Hz noise probably easily passes between analog and digital ground planes. Since the RCA output is single-ended, it will pass through supply noise.

Amir is pretty vague about the rest of the setup. I'm presuming he is using USB from the Ethernet music streamer to the DAC. One of the things that makes USB problematic in audio is that you can't really isolate the ground and 5V between the two devices attached by USB. If he used fiber, there is probably no noise at 60Hz. If he used coax...it depends.

I would really love to hear an explanation of how you think this is jitter, in your words.