Does Ethernet Cable makes sound difference like an USB cable?

[davewantsmoore]

7 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

OK, the discussion seems to be divulging from whether or not a particular brand (price) of Ethernet cable will sound better than another, to whether or not noise on your network will cause audible degradation.

I consider them to be the same discussion 

 

[bob_m_54]

1 minute ago, davewantsmoore said:

I consider them to be the same discussion 

 

Nope, two distinct and separate discussions.

Edited December 15, 2019 by bob_m_54

[Guest rmpfyf]

1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

 

I think many more products are on the market, than you currently suspect, that have eliminated any problems in this area.  Even quite modest products are benefiting from advancements  that have migrated into the building blocks now routinely used by many designers.

 

Nope. I dev in the area for fun.

 

The right stuff costs money.

[Guest rmpfyf]

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

Harder to test this with a good test  (A/B switching of cables from the listening chair with a button) .... without the right network switch, and some gymnastics at the client end.

Appreciatedm. Easy enough on a PC, which is what I use.

 

I'll freely admit that a PC with a general-purpose CPU isn't inherently an audiophile device... We're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear here.

[Guest rmpfyf]

35 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

OK, the discussion seems to be divulging from whether or not a particular brand (price) of Ethernet cable will sound better than another, to whether or not noise on your network will cause audible degradation.

For the original question I'll say that the brand of cable, as long as it conforms to the IEEE standard for that particular class of Ethernet cable, will not make an audible difference to your system. Simply put, conforming cables will be equal in data/audio performance.

Now if you are talking about whether or not noise on your network cabling will audibly affect your system, it may, but that is a characteristic of the upstream and downstream hardware, and not something the audiophile priced cable, in comparison to the complying, non audiophile priced cable, can fix. The audiophile priced cable will transmit that noise just as faithfully as the non audiophile priced cable of the same category.

If you are alluding to the noise being induced into the cable in question, from a noisy piece of hardware, then again, providing the cables are of the same category (and shielded/unshielded etc), they will perform the same and transmit or reject said noise the same.

An audiophile priced Ethernet cable will not give you a wider sound stage, better instrument separation, blacker blacks, more openness and airiness and not even a tighter base. Transmitted data doesn't even understand these concepts.

In the olden days, people used to play chess by mail. This worked well up to the point when rain entered your mailbox and left the letter unreadable, or someone nicked your mail, and the worst scenario when there was a mail strike, and nothing got through.

 

Your post could be interpreted to suggest different IEEE spec cables should sound different on account, which isn't directly the case.

 

You're right that a cable will not fix anything upstream and will not affect any poor characteristics downstream. I'd we assume the data is all there, the only other possibility is timing.

 

A cable doesn't offer perfect EMI immunity, it can even act as an antenna. This is only worth note if you have an EMI problem in addition to a fundamental sensitivity to timing on your playback device.

 

I would offer that better timing accuracy does increase spatial resolution - time alignment of audible pressure waveforms are the very neuro-auditory mechanism that create a sense of space/depth perception.

 

At any rate these are small differences at the bleeding edge. And commodity cables are frankly so good and so inexpensive that it's honestly cheap to try... So if you're curious, give it a go IMHO.

[bob_m_54]

4 minutes ago, rmpfyf said:

 

Your post could be interpreted to suggest different IEEE spec cables should sound different on account, which isn't directly the case.

 

You're right that a cable will not fix anything upstream and will not affect any poor characteristics downstream. I'd we assume the data is all there, the only other possibility is timing.

 

A cable doesn't offer perfect EMI immunity, it can even act as an antenna. This is only worth note if you have an EMI problem in addition to a fundamental sensitivity to timing on your playback device.

 

I would offer that better timing accuracy does increase spatial resolution - time alignment of audible pressure waveforms are the very neuro-auditory mechanism that create a sense of space/depth perception.

 

At any rate these are small differences at the bleeding edge. And commodity cables are frankly so good and so inexpensive that it's honestly cheap to try... So if you're curious, give it a go IMHO.

I didn't mean it to read that way. I was just trying to differentiate that, for example, a CAT6 unshielded may be susceptible to noise induction more than an unshielded CAT6 cable.

Edited December 15, 2019 by bob_m_54

[aussievintage]

 

16 minutes ago, rmpfyf said:

 

Nope. I dev in the area for fun.

 

The right stuff costs money.

 

OK, enough then.  I still disagree, but I see you are convinced.

[Ittaku]

9 minutes ago, rmpfyf said:

I'd we assume the data is all there, the only other possibility is timing.

 

A cable doesn't offer perfect EMI immunity, it can even act as an antenna. This is only worth note if you have an EMI problem in addition to a fundamental sensitivity to timing on your playback device.

 

I would offer that better timing accuracy does increase spatial resolution - time alignment of audible pressure waveforms are the very neuro-auditory mechanism that create a sense of space/depth perception.

Are you implying that different standard ethernet cables will lead to resends or that conduction velocity itself down the differing data cables is (substantially) different? Neither of these is in the realms of likelihood.

 

4 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

I didn't mean it to read that way. I was just trying to differentiate that, for example, a CAT6 unshielded may be susceptible to noise induction more than an unshielded CAT6 cable.

Fortunately the CAT6 spec has extreme shielding requirements described in the spec itself. You have to get to CAT4 before you lose shielding, or... an audiophile ethernet cable of no spec. where they feel that removing the shielding gives it a more open sound. Yeah I know...

Edited December 15, 2019 by Ittaku

[bob_m_54]

But CAT6 doesn't actually specify shielding. That is, you can have CAT6 unshielded cable.

[Ittaku]

6 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

But CAT6 doesn't actually specify shielding. That is, you can have CAT6 unshielded cable.

Now you've got me looking it up. I was pretty sure it was impossible to meet cat6 spec without shielding, but I have to look to be sure...

[Ittaku]

10 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

Now you've got me looking it up. I was pretty sure it was impossible to meet cat6 spec without shielding, but I have to look to be sure...

You're right, I was thinking of USB which explicitly states shielding. CAT6 does not, but it is very hard to meet its specifications without using shielding.

[bob_m_54]

3 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

You're right, I was thinking of USB which explicitly states shielding. CAT6 does not, but it is very hard to meet its specifications without using shielding.

Many non-audiophile cable manufacturers would disagree.

[Ittaku]

Just now, bob_m_54 said:

Many non-audiophile cable manufacturers would disagree.

And no doubt their cables would struggle to meet anything beyond CAT4.

[bob_m_54]

Legitimately they can't state CAT6 on the cable unless it complies with the standard. And any cable manufacturer who prints "CAT6" on their cable would understand the implications.

[Guest rmpfyf]

32 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

OK, enough then.  I still disagree, but I see you are convinced.

 

Sure... I have data from some of what I do. And I don't disagree with you on most of what you suggest. 

 

There's simply much out there's that's susceptible. The parts required to make good cost more. Not a ton more at bill of materials level, though it's there, plus assy, plus markup, plus... There's a ton of DACs out there not so designed.

 

And yes, there are DAC IC designs that are inherently better to these ends. There are DACs with pretty robust reclocking and isolation schemes outside of the ICs. 

 

Point for the OP on whether or not it'll make a difference is.... is that it really depends. In their scenario (as stated before) I'd suggest it's unlikely. In mine it sure does. If you've the ability to A/B without a cable attached, finding out is infinitely cheap, and an otherwise inexpensive cable otherwise.

 

I wouldn't rush to join those on SNA that have worked out there are buffers all over the data chain and have accordingly anointed themselves a computer science degree with 'ha! Data cables mean nothing'. There is certainly scope for an audible effect. And there's certainly scope for someone to have designed around as much too.

 

37 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

Are you implying that different standard ethernet cables will lead to resends or that conduction velocity itself down the differing data cables is (substantially) different? Neither of these is in the realms of likelihood.

No, don't be silly.

 

37 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

Fortunately the CAT6 spec has extreme shielding requirements described in the spec itself. You have to get to CAT4 before you lose shielding, or... an audiophile ethernet cable of no spec. where they feel that removing the shielding gives it a more open sound. Yeah I know...

That's inane (removing the shielding). Plenty of snake oil on our midst I guess.

 

CAT6 isn't always STP.

[Ittaku]

Then how are you implying cables affect timing?

[bob_m_54]

weight versus length when used as a skipping rope?

[Guest rmpfyf]

1 hour ago, Ittaku said:

Then how are you implying cables affect timing?

 

Stated earlier. Let's not go around again.

[Ittaku]

I must have missed it. Never mind, I'll go back looking for it. I think we've thrashed this part out enough.

[davewantsmoore]

4 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

Appreciatedm. Easy enough on a PC, which is what I use.

So, when you do this.... ie. sit in the listening chair and A/B switch between different ethernet cables, by the press of a button.

 

You hear a difference between the cables?

[Guest rmpfyf]

11 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

So, when you do this.... ie. sit in the listening chair and A/B switch between different ethernet cables, by the press of a button.

 

You hear a difference between the cables?

I hear a difference when dropping the interface, and when moving it from core to core. Easy enough to verify something's happened by logging interrupts.

 

A/B ing cables is not as accurate IMHO. Part of the reason I keep spend minimal.

 

Hoping when the FIFO goes in that this is all moot.

Edited December 15, 2019 by rmpfyf

[dbastin]

On 15/12/2019 at 4:13 AM, rmpfyf said:

They're all tested to standards or they can't be called Ethernet. This said the standards involved pertain to maximum bandwidth and non audiophile contexts. Our bandwidths are low, we care about the shielding. A great example is CAT8 - none here is streaming 40Gbps of audio, and some people have 5m lengths of it... It was never intended to run said lengths.

 

We had a good thread earlier about the merits of STP or UTP in audio use. Some good information was brought up.

Well, can you suggest just 1 of each Cat 6, Cat 7 and Cat 8, and where to get them?

 

Where is the thread you refer to?

[Guest rmpfyf]

21 minutes ago, dbastin said:

Well, can you suggest just 1 of each Cat 6, Cat 7 and Cat 8, and where to get them?

 

Where is the thread you refer to?

 

Honestly I've forgotten which thread, though someone made a suggestion for Belden 10GX UTP which I thought was pretty sharp. 

 

I use 1m Elecom CAT8 (not the slim variant) which can be had from a number of o/s vendors without too much trouble. Didn't go searching for it particularly, bought it on a whim when overseas. There's other CAT8 on Amazon. That goes into a medical-grade isolator, then into the PC. It sounds better than anything I've had and I really wish it didn't.

 

Prior to that it was CAT 6a (didn't like as much), 6 and 5e from. 4Cabling cables are actually quite good, inexpensive and easy to source. I understand enough of cabling and of how Ethernet can affect SQ in my rig enough to accept it's there to not want to go spend significant money on 'audiophile' cables... can spend that money elsewhere to better ends IMHO.

 

Not sure where you'd get the Belden kit to try - the specs do look quite good. Certainly worth a try.

[Ittaku]

Be wary of the Amazon ones unless they're known brands. There's some cheap Chinese garbage there that claims to be cat whatever but usually is not. I've thrown out some alleged cat8 cable I bought from there because it didn't even perform basic functionality reliably. The monoprice stuff should be fine.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Ittaku

[mattjtaylor2809]

Hi All,

 

I've just bought & installed these cables....well actually only one as the shorter of the x2 cables appears to have a fault & the effect on the sound was night & day.

 

https://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649599709-audiophile-ethernet-cat8-ethernet-10silver-solid-core-ofhcc-copper-22-gaugetelegartner-81-terminatio/

 

To ensure I'm not talking nonsense I will run my system for 24-48 hours & then swap back to the el-cheapo Cat 6 cables I was using before & see what changes.

 

Cheers

Matt